Bionic Retinas Give Patients Sight

The Noof writes " Yahoo News is running a story about patients who have been given partial sight thanks to implants of silicon-based bionic retinas. " The article notes that the implant is having a "rescue effect" on the other components of the retina, restoring cells around the implant and making them useful again." Amazing stuff.

Comments

We have the technology

[Anonymous Coward]

We can save him.

Lose the arm.

Was I the only one...?

[doorbot.com]

For some reason, I read this story's title as "Bionic Retinas Give Patents Sight" which I thought was a reference to issuing/implanting bionic retinas in USPTO employees so that they would be better able to read the rediculous patents which cross their desks.

Maybe I could use a set of bionic retinas...

Re:Was I the only one...?

[JPawloski]

This is definitely cool stuff. Another step closer to cyborgs. :)

They only mention that this has been tested on people that have lost their vision - wonder if it'd do anything for people born blind?

I'd like to see more science articles like this on the front page of slashdot!

Re:Was I the only one...?

[Anonymous Coward]

I see you've finally figured out how cut and paste works...

Re:Was I the only one...?

[xWeston]

I'd assume it'd depend on the reason the person had blindness. For many, im sure that their retinas are indeed fine, but what is the problem is the optic nerve. In fact, one of my friends friends (chain rule) lost his sight from some sort of pressure on his brain that he got from hitting his head, it pinched off the nerve and killed it. Now all we need is synthetic optic nerves!

Re:Was I the only one...?

[Oculus Habent]

People who are born with visual impairments that can be corrected with technology (i.e. not visual cortex failure) have very low chances of worthwhile results.

When the brain never receives stimulus in a cortex, it never forms any pathways. That portion of the brain, while functional, makes no connections with anything else. A person with visual implants might be able to see as well (maybe better) than you and I, but they wouldn't understand what they saw. They would have technical function but no visual acuity.

This same issue has been demonstrated in people who grew up deaf. They may obtain the ability to hear, but understanding is something they can most likely never acheive. The new sense has missed the "formative" years of the brain, and the individual will never be able to use the sense as others do.

For those who have a hard time comprehending this concept (which is completely understandable), liken it to suddenly having wings surgically attached. Sure, you may have wings, and it's physically possible to fly, but you've never had wings before. They don't work like arms or legs, and you'll probably never learn to control them well enough to fly.

If you still aren't sure, watch At First Sight. It shows quite well the problems a person would face were they to regain sight. And keep in mind, he once could see.

Re:Was I the only one...?

[Egonis]

In theory... wouldn't stem cells help with that?
They can re-attach a rat's spinal cord.... why not an optic nerve?

There are a magnitude of congenital vision defects, ranging from retinal damage, internal eye pressure problems, optic nerve problems.. but the strangest to date I have encountered is Congenital Anomaly (the absense of eyes as a result of oxygen treatment as an infant)

Re:Was I the only one...?

[ObviousGuy]

If you're really interested in learning about this kind of neurological problem, I recommend reading Oliver Sacks. He's got a couple good books out on the subject. Of course the books are as dry as parchment, but the information is very good.

Re:Was I the only one...?

[Hast]

Seems like that movie "At first sight" is actually based on a book by Sacks. Naturally that most likely mean that they have completely trashed the story of the book. ;-)

Re:Was I the only one...?

[Arcturax]

Well in this case then one would want to put the implants in as early as possible. Once they have ironed out all the problems and improved them, they will likely be available for those born with out or with damaged retinas within a few years.

Re:Was I the only one...?

[telecsan]

One of the issues with people born blind however, is not a matter of having the ability to "look" at something, it is having developed the capacity to process that information and actually "see" something. It's a process that infants spend a good deal of time on, learning how to process the information given to them by their eyes. In many cases it is nearly impossible for an adult to learn this ability. Making sense of surroundings would be a concious effort, and a struggle at that. It's unfortunate that being blind through childhood years makes it that much harder to ever have sight.

Sound effects

[Anonymous Coward]

Does it come complete with that cool sound effect when zoom is used.

Good thing...

[sisukapalli1]

At least this will push lasik surgery to an "old but reliable technology", so that people will feel more comfortable with that.

S

Re:Good thing...

[damn dirty ape]

lasik surgery won't repair your retina..

question

[CmdrSanity]

So I guess the most obvious question is: how long before the bionic retina is better than the real thing and would you get one?

Neat stuff.

Re:question

[istartedi]

Let's build on that. How dense could the sensors get before the optical limits of the eye would become the bottleneck?

Also, since these things are using the photo-voltaic effect to generate the electrical impulse, isn't there a limit to how well they would work in low light? Can that limit be overcome? Could they build units that grabbed inductive power from a transmitter in your glasses to overcome that problem, or maybe even allow super night vision? Will future soldiers be encouraged to get such implants? On the opposite side of that equation, would they allow you to look at the sun without being damaged?

Re:question

[bleckywelcky]

Absolutely seriously. My eyes aren't in that bad of shape, but they aren't exactly perfect either. Plus I can't see IR or UV. If bionic eyes were tested enough to be completely safe and healthy for the body, as well as 99.999% reliable (preferably 100%), they could be considered a reliable replacement. Add in a few features like integration into computing systems, switching between UV detection, IR detection, and traditional visible light detection, etc, and you would have some really awesome eyes. I would absolutely pick up a pair of these if they were cheap enough and fail safe enough. It would almost be a step toward Predator type systems, just get me a shoulder cannon and I'm all set :) . Just imagine being able to step up to a computer console and plug yourself in. Or even better, using secure IR signals (make sure to switch out of IR detection mode, heh) or WiFi signals. Add in a few memory modules, and you can carry all of your data with you. This would be great.

Re:question

[Anonymous Coward]

assuming safety, count me in. It is the future, after all...folks like Tiger Woods already have better than 20/20 in each eye thanks to laser surgery...

Re:question

[SumDeusExMachina]

Or how about this: when implantation starts becoming widespread, will someone find a way to modify the signals produced to induce an optical illusion in the user? How would reality change if someone's sense are showing them something that isn't really "there".

Better yet, if these malfunction in conjunction with other sense that may be "bionicized", in such a manner as someone is led to believe that they are stumbling over a chair or running into a wall, does this mean they really are? I mean, if you "scrape" yourself on something rough, even though you haven't, and you look at your arm and it appears bloody (even though other people see that it is uninjured), and then touch it and feel the wetness of blood, have you been injured?

Re:question

[DavittJPotter]

Actually, this hits really close to home - my Dad had a retina become detached about six months ago, and it was very scary for him and for us while he recovered. Now he's concerned about his other eye, and if he'll be able to continue seeing. He's 54 years old, and is terrified of losing his sight. As for me, I have poor vision, and wonder if his retina problems will also befall me. I say push forward on this, so my Dad can continue to see his grandchildren.

Re:question

[Anonymous Coward]

I would like a bionic rectum. Then I could open bottles with it, unscrew bolts, and poop on command. If I was really bored, I could open it up and stick some fake vampire teeth in it, take a picture, and call it Vivendi. :)

Re:question

[modecx]

All hail Geordi LaForge, prince of nerdiness!

Just Kidding :). Allthings aside, if they could not be snooped (Van Eck Phreaking a body is about the worst way you could violate a person, IMO), and could not be EMFed easily (and I mean that these things should stand so much gauss that my blood would disassemble first), I might just get some bionic eyes too.

And, for the inner pervert in us, if these things could see IR well enough.. Well, just think about the Sony Handycam. Cheers!

Re:question

[Aix]

I think you underestimate just how good human biological vision really is. It is easy to think at first that rods and cones are just like CCDs or pixels or whatever. It is far more complicated than that. In fact, there is extensive research that demonstrates that you can see in higher resolution than should be optically possible. The reason this works is complicated, but basically comes down to the fact that there is an immense amount of inter-cellular interpolation going on. It can be modeled simplistically as an array of voltage sources.

A good starter paper might be the classic "What the Frog's Eye Tells The Frog's Brain" by McCullough, Pitts and Lettvin. (From MIT's RLE Lab in the 50's) More recently, Marr's stuff is supposed to be very good.

Re:question

[BWJones]

As a retinal scientist who knows more than a bit about the problem, I am saying 30 years.

Re:question

[gmhowell]

Seeing as how cochlear implants still suck compared to natural hearing, it'll be a while.

(Although, FWIW, as soon as these things are approved for use, my wife will be getting them.)

Re:question

[istartedi]

you can see in higher resolution than should be optically possible

That seems very counter-intuitive, but since you've suggested it, I can postulate at least one way that could be achieved: When something moves, you get multiple samples per cell, which the optical-neural system could then be intelligently integrating into a higher resolution picture. If that's true though, it wouldn't help you when staring intently at something that isn't moving.

If those papers can suggest anything that allows you to improve resolution when neither the subject nor the optical receptors are moving, I will be truly impressed. Actually, I think that's impossible but I can't prove it off the top of my head.

Re:question

[deglr6328]

"Could they build units that grabbed inductive power from a transmitter in your glasses to overcome that problem, or maybe even allow super night vision?"

I bet these people in the trial already have a form of "night vision" from their implant. The human eye's response to light cuts off at ~700nm; most photosensitive electronics extend well past that. All you'd need to do is buy one of these and plug it in!

Re:question

[aswang]

With regards to the light sensitivity problem, while I'm not sure how the chip actually interacts with neurons, if they've duplicated how the biological eye works, the photoreceptor's output would actually be inversely proportional to the amount of light hitting it. In complete darkness, rods (and cones) generate a so-called "dark current." (And unlike more typical neurons, they don't generate an all-or-nothing action potential) But as soon as only a single photon hits a single rhodopsin molecule, the signal transduction cascade amplifies the signal and decreases the dark current--seriously, the theoretical sensitivty of an individual photoreceptor is a single quantum of light. The thing is, though, the retina works nothing like a CCD--the brain does not read pixels. Before the entire signal even leaves the retina, it has already gone through two layers of integration. This is the reason why resolution is not straight-forward. By the time the signal has gotten to the primary visual cortex, the signal has already been translated into separate components depicting static orientation and direction of movement. So the real limitation is the practical resolution achievable that is somewhat hardwired by the genes that build the brain.

But back to the light sensitivity problem: In the biological eye, the magnitude of the dark current can be modulated by other factors like intracellular calcium concentration, which partially explains how the eye can adapt to different ranges of light intensity. (I.e., it partly explains why you're initially practically blind when you leave a movie theater but quickly readapt to outdoor light levels.) So if you made the artificial photoreceptor resistant to damage from, for example, sunlight, or even X-rays and gamma rays, to an extent, you could look at anything without ever worrying about frying your brain. But while the photoreceptive material can probably be easily changed to capture, for example, longer wavelengths for infrared or shorter wavelengths to see UV, x-rays, or maybe even electrons, the main problem would be that the signal would most likely be meaningless to the brain. At best, it would take a long adjustment period probably accompanied by nausea and vomiting before the brain could adapt to the signal, and then switching back to normal vision would require the same adjustment.

Re:question

[Yarn]

In bright light the optical limits of the eye are already the bottleneck.

As both the retina and lens system both evolved more or less simulatiously this is only to be expected.

The point spread function primary and secondary peaks map onto two photoreceptors.

In the dark the iris is larger, so the psf is larger.

To get better vision would require adaptive optics (like used in telescopes) and we're not even sure if the brain could handle it ;)

Re:question

[ndpatel]

but in your eye, the receptors are always moving--it's very hard to keep you head and neck still, let alone your body, which is jolted regularly by heartbeats and respiration, so your eye muscles are always moving around.

if you don't believe me, go zen for a minute and stare at something on your desk. pay attention to your head--how high it is, when you can feel your heart beat. it's really hard to stay perfectly still.

Re:question

[Anonymous Coward]

I would bet the brain could handle it, if it is like normal vision. I thinking like Terminiator style vision from the movie. The computer would just make you think that there is a crosshair out there in your field of vision, but it's not. The computer eye would control exactly what you see in your normal range of vision, but it may convert different wavelengths into that good range.

The next part is getting the computer to make you see that you are on a beach, in Quake 3 Arena, in the movie... It would even make me think twice about getting one. It would be the the holodeck in Star Trek. You really never left, but all of your senses tell you that you have.

Re:question

[guacamolefoo]

"In fact, there is extensive research that demonstrates that you can see in higher resolution than should be optically possible. The reason this works is complicated, but basically comes down to the fact that there is an immense amount of inter-cellular interpolation going on."

Another excellent resource discussing the visual system and its interaction with the brain is "The Astonishing Hypothesis" by Francis Crick, who, along with Watson, did a great deal of groundbreaking work on DNA. The book's premise is that thought is simply the result of the interactions of neurons rather than a "soul". Crick explains how the visual system interprets images and the impact this may have on things like AI, neural networks, etc.

The retina is actually one of the more exposed areas of the brain and it is encouraging to see (no pun intended) that science is developing ways to interact with the brain via technology. I am wondering if the things these patients can now see are subject to the same sorts of strangeness that human patients can experience with vision under some of the experimental circumstances described by Crick in his book.

On a final note, this seems similar to the way cochlear implants interact with the ear and brain. Rush Limbaugh, love him or hate him, is probably the most famous person with cochlear implants, and they have undeniably helped him to continue to hear the sound of his own voice.

So we have the genesis of bionic ears and eyes. The input devices are being built (hopefully with good UARTs). The next step may be to work on the interpretive elements. Interesting times, these.

Guac-foo.

Re:question

[Gruturo]

>>"Could they build units that grabbed inductive power from a transmitter in your glasses to overcome that problem, or maybe even allow super night vision?"

>I bet these people in the trial already have a form of "night vision" from their implant. The human eye's response to light cuts off at ~700nm; most photosensitive electronics extend well past that.

I think it's even better:
Currently, night vision means light amplification or light conversion (from Infrared to visible). These electronics could possibly enable you to SEE those frequencies without converting them to the conventional "visible" spectrumo (430-700nm). Imagine SEEing Infrared and/or UV.... new colours!!!!!!!!

Re:question

[Ioldanach]

When something moves, you get multiple samples per cell, which the optical-neural system could then be intelligently integrating into a higher resolution picture. If that's true though, it wouldn't help you when staring intently at something that isn't moving.

I should note that research has looked at this. If you look at a single point, you can observe a blackout effect. All but the point you're looking at slowly goes dark until only what you're looking at is identifiable. (Or I'm forgetting, and everything goes darker. Its been a few years since that course in college.) The net result is that most of what you see is triggered by changing light levels, not the static images you look at for a few milliseconds at a time.

Re:question

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm ... I just want a "zoom" feature built into my eyes.

Re:question

[lukesl]

There's actually been some interesting work done on that based on this nonlinear phenomenon called stochastic resonance. There's a link to a paper here.

BTW, the phenomenon is called hyperacuity, and it specifically refers to having higher resolution than should be allowed by the size of the photoreceptor cells in the retina. I state this explicitly because it is not something due to a more optics-related phenomenon like the fundamental wavelength limit of the light or anything like that.

Full Article Text

[Devil's BSD]

Bionic Retina Gives Six Patients Partial Sight
Wed May 8,10:30 AM ET
By Julie Steenhuysen

CHICAGO (Reuters) - They're not as fast as Lee Majors' Bionic Man, but six patients implanted with bionic retinas are seeing things they haven't seen in years.

Thanks to an artificial silicon retina, the six patients, many of whom were virtually blind, are rediscovering simple gifts of the sighted: the flight of a flock of geese, the pattern on a well-worn tablecloth, the face of a loved one.

The patients are part of a pilot study of a solar-powered microchip created by Optobionics, a private company based in Wheaton, Illinois.

The microchips, surgically implanted behind the retina, are smaller than the head of a pin and about half the thickness of a sheet of paper. They work by converting light into electrical impulses.

"What we are doing is trying to replace the function of photoreceptors," said Dr. Alan Chow, a pediatric ophthalmologist and chief operating officer of Optobionics. He developed the chip with his brother Vincent Chow, an electrical engineer.

Loss of light-sensing photoreceptor cells occurs in retinitis pigmentosa and macular degeneration, the two most common causes of untreatable blindness in developed countries, affecting at least 20 million people worldwide.

What Dr. Chow found is that the chips also seem to be stimulating remaining healthy cells.

"We're pretty excited. We initially expected only some light perception where the implant was. What seems to be improvement outside the areas was unexpected," he said.

'RESCUE EFFECT'

He said the device is having a "rescue effect" on the retina, restoring cells located near the implant site.

"What we think is happening is the implant is stimulating other cells around the retina. We're finding vision is improving not just where the implant is but also in areas near the implant," he said.

Chow is presenting his results later on Wednesday at the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology annual meeting in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

The trial includes three patients implanted with the chips for 9 months and three implanted for 21 months. Patients range in age from 45 to 76. All had lost their vision to retinitis pigmentosa, a hereditary condition in which the retina gradually degenerates.

Chow said the study was conducted to determine whether the device is safe. "In all six patients there are no signs of infection, inflammation, rejection or detachment," Chow said. He also said the chip has not eroded or moved, and none of the patients have experienced any pain or discomfort. "None can tell there is an implant in their eye," he said.

What they can tell is that they can see better.

Chow said one patient, who has had the implant for 9 months, saw his wife's face for the first time in years. The man, who previously could only see hand motions from four to five feet away, can now see cars from half a block away.

Another patient, who could not detect light even if a bright light was pointed at his eye, now knows when he needs to turn off his porch light.

For another patient, though, the implant has been a bit sobering, Chow said. The patient, who has begun to recognize faces, was disappointed to see how his own face had aged. But he was quick to note signs of age in his brother, who also received an implant.

Chow said his company will continue following the patients, with implants planned for the near future.

Optobionics' corporate investors include medical device giant Medtronic Inc. and CIBA Vision Corp., the eye care unit of Novartis AG.

Re:Full Article Text

[0x0d0a]

Yes, it would be awful if Yahoo got slashdotted, wouldn't it? Better post the article, just to make sure.

Re:Full Article Text

[Anonymous Coward]

well, I'm sure these big name servers do go offline temporarily or get DoS'ed or stuff. After all, Murphy's ghost haunts us all.

Re:Full Article Text

[RTFA Man]

I love the blatent copyright violations on slashdot. Jesus.

What, do you think YAHOO is going to get slashdotted? Get a clue.

Re:Full Article Text

[Jon_Katz (Paranoid F]

Yeah, Yahoo just can't handle that traffic can it? Mod Parent down : -1 Dumbass

Re:Full Article Text

[reflexreaction]

Chow said one patient, who has had the implant for 9 months, saw his wife's face for the first time in years. The man, who previously could only see hand motions from four to five feet away, can now see cars from half a block away.

Yes but could he read /. ?

Re:Full Article Text

[isorox]

Yes, it would be awful if Yahoo got slashdotted, wouldn't it?

Hey, it could be worse, how long to people link to google cache's of the API's in Google Releases an API for Their Database?

But someone might yet post a link to the google cache of his post, just in case!

Re:Full Article Text

[Winged Cat]

I'd bet a sufficiently large Beowulf cluster of slashdot effects could take even Yahoo! down. ^_^

Uh Oh...

[NiftyNews]

Maybe their super-vision can help add to the list of continuity errors in Spider-Man...

Re:Uh Oh...

[I.T.R.A.R.K.]

You're still pissed off about that whole genetically altered/radioactic spider confusion, aren't you? ;)

Re:Uh Oh...

[Anonymous Coward]

Organic web-shooters are an abomination before god, damn it.

Re:Uh Oh...

[paganizer]

I've just had to come to the realization that this is not about the REAL spiderman.

figs

[Anonymous Coward]

Thts cooll. Matbe now I cam seee wat I typ.

Re:figs

[reflexreaction]

Woohoo! No more text-to-speech /.

wow, neat stuff

[siliconwafer]

This is definitely cool stuff. Another step closer to cyborgs.

They only mention that this has been tested on people that have lost their vision - wonder if it'd do anything for people born blind?

I'd like to see more science articles like this on the front page of slashdot!

Re:wow, neat stuff

[Devil's BSD]

wonder if it'd do anything for people born blind? I dunno. My impression is no, since they have never seen and would not know how to interpret the signals. Your brain atrophies too, you know. But I could be wrong, since seeing might be an innate behavior.

Re:wow, neat stuff

[pennsol]

I think it would all depend on the reason they are blind.. if it's because of optical nerve dammage i doubt it but for retnal problems maybe.. the amazing thing is that they have microchips that can talk to nerve endings.. being someone who only has partial use of one foot because of nerve dammage in a car accident this is good news.. when you cut the nerves it extremly hard to get the nerve to transfer the electrical impulses properly again..but if they can make your retina see light again there is hope for other types of nerve endings in the body..i think this reaserch will help others regain the use of dammaged nerve endings..

Re:wow, neat stuff

[RFC959]

You're pretty much right. There's an article in the June issue of Discover (which the website does not yet acknowledge the existence of, oh well) about corneal repairs, and one man in particular, blind since age 3, who had his corneas repaired. And yes, although his eyes now should allow him to see fine, he can't interpret what he sees. (One interesting side effect: he's immune to certain optical illusions, because he never learned to interpret images in the way that gives rise to the illusion!) Studies have been done with animals, too, in which animals are blindfolded at birth and their eyes only uncovered after they've reached adulthood - and although their eyes are physically fine, they're unable to actually use their vision. "Seeing" seems to be mostly post-processing by the brain.

Re:wow, neat stuff

[nucal]

Yeah, if only articles like this were submitted more often. Oh wait a minute .... 2002-05-08 16:52:09 Real Life Bionic Eye (articles,science) (rejected)

Maybe they can give these to referees!

[Hexray]

I know a few calls where I would feel more comfortable if the refs had had these implants recently, if you know what I mean...

Sound Effects?

[wcspxyx]

But do they come with the cool sound effects like Col. Steve Austin?

Do-to-to-to-to-to-to-to-to-to-to-to....

Thank goodness

[reflexreaction]

That there is no "blind-community" counterpart to the deaf-community that was up in arms about cochlear implants. Could you imagine Stevie wonder saying that these are bad things?

Re:Thank goodness

[Anonymous Coward]

That there is no "blind-community" counterpart to the deaf-community

Rather, there is no apparent blind community to those who are not directly involved with it.

Having blind family members, I can say that there is actually a very large blind community, which I believe is necessary. It is important to realize that people with certain types of disabilities have different struggles and lifestyles then the general population, and being involved with others who share the same experiences can definately help in making life a little easier and pleasent.

Also from my experience, people who have been blind from birth or early childhood would likely not chose to have an implant/surgery to correct the blindness for a few reasons.

First, those adults who were blind from birth have areas in the brain responsible for sight that are not developed because they have never used them. If one of these people were to undergo a operation to correct the blindness, the person's brain would still not be able to interperet the stimulus in a coherent manner. They would see, but they wouldn't understand what they were seeing.

Second (even if the first was not an issue), could you imagine viewing the world in a certain manner, and then one day, having all your preconceptions about everything shatter?

People who have been blind from birth have never seen(duh!), but they do however have an understanding about seeing (ie. colors, patterns, etc.). This differs from the actual experience of seeing as we know it, and taking those concepts away would be tramatic. Most people would be unable to cope with this.

Lastly, this is part of who the person is no matter how much it is disliked or how much of an inconvience it is. It is accepted, much like other things that (for the most part) cannot be changed. Having a hatred for something that is a piece of one's self, that cannot easily be changed, is unhealthy. So is having false dreams about "miracles" or "cures".

Re:Thank goodness

[gmhowell]

Wish I had mod points. Wife is deaf blind (yes, for the third time in this story) and while she never got a load of shit from the deaf community, it's only because she flat out didn't give a fuck. She wanted implants.

We talked about it: not only would the blind 'community' embrace this, they are likely to demand the federal government pay to install them on anybody who would benefit.

Re:Thank goodness

[Anonymous Coward]

I would take that bet. I think that they would easily cope. I think about it this way, if I were in a house at night that was totally dark, it would take a little longer to find stuff. But if one day somebody turned on the lights, I could find the same stuff, but using sight instead of my other senses.

Re:Thank goodness

[vidarh]

I think you miss the point of the poster you replied to.

What he's referring to is likely that there are significant groups in the deaf community that are heavily opposed to "fixing" deafness with implants or similar, and believe it should be left as is, and that to accept implants implies that being deaf isn't "normal". Some deaf groups even consider implants a treat to particular cultural elements of the deaf community.

While I'm sure there are many blind people that would not personally want to use implants like these for whatever reason, the poster you replied to was implying that there is no strong element in the blind community that opposes such implants in principle.

Re:Thank goodness

[Anonymous Coward]

Not really. How would you know the visual clues like distance and shape if you've never seen it?

Read some of the stuff by Oliver Sacks for stories about people who regained sight (among other things).

Re:Thank goodness

[Ser_Olmy]

I disagree. I'm (natch) totally ignorant of what it must be like to be blind, I don't even know any blind people - but if it were possible...

... I'd certainly be first in line to enhance *my* perceptual capabillities. I'd like to be able to see in infrared, have macro-zoom abillities (preferably stereoscopic), micromillimetre radar and some form of high-rez sonar. Why not?

Oh, and there's prolly other stuff as well, like being able to sense electromagnetic fields(sp?)...

Re:Thank goodness

[FreeUser]

While much of your post is insightful, I think you make some assumptions that are questionable, if not perhaps outright wrong.

This differs from the actual experience of seeing as we know it, and taking those concepts away would be tramatic. Most people would be unable to cope with this.

People have their preconceptions shattered every day. You are right, it can be a very traumatic experience, but people can and do cope with it, often so well that they become more than they were previously as a result. I think you are wrong to asert that most people would be unable to cope with it. I'm not even sure most people would choose not to cope with it and remain blind, given the choice.

Lastly, this is part of who the person is no matter how much it is disliked or how much of an inconvience it is.

Being cancer prone, or obese, or having a sexual dysfunction is also a part of what a person is. People change, sometimes for the worse, hopefully for the better.

Althoug I have no idea what it would be like to be blind, I can say with absolute certainty that if someone came along and offered to implant a Guizgovot(tm), that would offer me a new sense hitherto unknown to any life form on earth ("a gestalt sense of mean density of matter within two hundred miles, with acuity down to the molecular level accessible by different levels of concentration and focus, coupled or decoupled from the mean electromagnetic flux of the same" the advertisment might read) I would jump at the opportunity to enhance myself in such a way, even being relatively clueless as to how my mind would interpret such a sense, or what good it would do me. An opportunity to experience the world around me with a new and different sense, to sense it in a whole new way, would be a profoundly precious opportunity.

It might change an aspect of who I am, and certainly become a part of who I am, but it by no means would denigrate my identity or eradicate who I was. Neither would getting a prosthetic eye to replace a dysfunctional one, any more than a wheelchair, or a walker, denigrates the identity of or changes who a person with said disability is.

Deaf people who are objecting to devices that can cure deafness, which is by any reasonable definition a deficit or challenge, if not an outright disability, are simply luddite jackasses IMHO, and while deafness might be a blessing in some situations (a screeching el-train going by comes to mind as one) and sign language is something we all should probably learn anyway (I've often wished I could hold a conversation in sign language when hanging out in a loud bar, or, again, as a loud train goes by overhead), rejecting access to a new sense because you think it somehow denigrates others with the same disability is just plain Stupid.

Cyborgs

[YahoKa]

Soon we'll all be cyborgs and our hearts will be pumping with a motor, controlled by linux (would you trust your heart beat to windows?), running on an AMD system. Hmm.. i like it :)

Re:Cyborgs

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but think of the overheating problems.

Three more cyborgs have mysteriously caught fire. All were using Athlons to control their bodily functions. Scientists are stumped.

Re:Cyborgs

[ActiveSX]

...running on an AMD system

Too bad we'd all die from heat exhaustion. Well, unless you want to have a liquid cooled rib cage.

Re:Cyborgs

[Anonymous Coward]

running on an AMD would have our body temps pushed well over 98.6f =)

Re:Cyborgs

[Anonymous Coward]

With a perspex window body mod, a neon light strapped to my aorta and a shelf for the beer, I'd be happy to let that liquid cooling double as my go-anywhere bar fridge.

Re:Cyborgs

[Servo5678]

And we can use a P2P network to share our thoughts and make our own little Collective.

Re:Cyborgs

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, there are some stories (as mentioned in waking life) where we humans allready have one essentially. The idea is we all get our instincts from everyone else. So that how we learn to survive is because other people have done it and we their knowledge is "zapped" into everyone elses....

Re:Cyborgs

[CrazyDuke]

Heh, yet another tin foil hat thought from me. If cybornetic implants start to become popular, how long before governments and corporations start sneaking in little extras. I'd hate to have a heart with a EULA. ...or one with a gps transmiter that tells some Big Bro with personal issues and a sadistic streak where I am all the time and if I "deviate" from the norm. Then there are the maitenence fees with all that hardware. What is one going to do? Not pay if the price is too high? I can already feel an oversized, serated corporate/government robo-phallus invading my oversensitized bionic colon, if you catch my drift. I doubt it will be extreme, but I doubt it will be fun either.

Another thing that bothers me. I keep making predictions, and I either denounce them myself before saying something or someone says I'm just paraniod (wearing a tin foil cap). Yet I see a bunch of the stuff I guessed happening. I seriously hope this doesn't.

Bah, maybe I'm just paranoid for no good reason.

Re:Cyborgs

[Anonymous Coward]

And we'll all have HUGE biceps from carrying around the 100-pound batteries needed to power that AMD CPU!!! Cool!!!

Improvements

[chill]

How long until they offer an "improved" version, that has an overlaid clock/calendar, or just a HUD connected to the implanted, bone-conductive phone?

How about that "cybog" professor and all the hassles he had getting past airport security. While these things are tiny, I can easily forsee a future whene implants are regulated country-by-country.

"Sorry sir. Memory-storage implants are not legal in Canada. You must reboard the airplane."

Johnny Mnemonic, here we come.

Re:Improvements

[Wylfing]

Yes, if you look very closely at these bionic eyes you will see the words "Zeiss-Ikon" etched onto the irises.

Re:Improvements

[Kraft]

For sure. My contact lenses have the logo of the company on them.

Re:Improvements

[Anonymous Coward]

Huh? The Prof you're talking about, Steve Mann, was flying within Canada.

Anyway security doesn't give a damn where you're flying to begin with; they care only about what you bring aboard the aircraft.

Re:Improvements

[Mockura]

How long until they offer an "improved" version, that has an overlaid clock/calendar, or just a HUD connected to the implanted, bone-conductive phone?

Only partially joking, but I can also see the reverse being true - X% discount if you can put up with scrolling banner ads at the bottom of your vision, etc.

Solar powered eyes?

[adporter]

Optobionics is using the energy in the light to do this, which differs from alternatives (the epiretinal approach) which requires external power sources and are therefore big fat and clunky.

Could this technology have a function in cameras?

Re:Solar powered eyes?

[Anonymous Coward]

reminds me of Cyclops' solar powered eyes ;)

Re:Solar powered eyes?

[paganizer]

You can power it via induction simply enough. just have your variating EM field originating in a pair of glasses, or a hat, or maybe a necklace. However, with the extremely low photovoltaic energy use these things must use considering the size mentioned, I have to think they could be powered by nervous energy, about 70mv if I remember correctly. You might get some artifacts in the organic material, though.

I wonder...

[maxmg]

Will there be Linux drivers for those things?

Re:I wonder...

[esper_child]

not for 6 months, but that is only if the community stays on the ball and current. 12 month - a year and a half for full functionallity. Even then you can't get support from the maker.

Can it be DoS'd?

[Jon Howard]

What kind of interference will upset the function of this device which wouldn't affect a normal eye? Can it be remotely manipulated in such a way as to malfunction or function in a way that a remote attacker may desire it to function?

The fact that I have to ask these questions makes me hesitant to put electronics in my head, but I can imagine that the concern would be less for someone who couldn't see without them.

Re:Can it be DoS'd?

[reflexreaction]

Yes but perhaps not in the way you think. While something like this has a possibility of being hacked, it will only be if someone puts backdoors into the low level hardware controlling the electrical signals along with the remote controller.

Fortunately the eye works differently than the typical I/O interface. Retinal neurons adjust quickly to stimilation and adjust firing patterns. Just think how quickly your eyes adjust to stepping out into a dark room from the sunlight or vice versa. Any permanent damage to the eye is usually from something physical rather than electrical. You can only burn out your eyes from looking at the sun and it's UV or whatever.

Also there is something called deploarization block in which the cell will simply not fire even if there is strong enough imput.

The other big factor is that while all the signalling is coming from this mechanical interface, all the interpretation is done in the Occipital Lobe and we don't and I don't think ever will have a great enough understanding of the brain to hack it.

Re:Can it be DoS'd?

[Jon Howard]

Yes but perhaps not in the way you think. While something like this has a possibility of being hacked, it will only be if someone puts backdoors into the low level hardware controlling the electrical signals along with the remote controller.

You don't suppose that the different material it is made out of might be somewhat affected by properly patterned RF transmissions? I know that silicon is much more responsive to RF than the usual tissue in that area is, perhaps this could be used to give people UV or IR vision rather than (or in addition to) normal vision. Fascinating stuff either way.

all the interpretation is done in the Occipital Lobe and we don't and I don't think ever will have a great enough understanding of the brain to hack it.

I'm much more of an technological optimist in the sense that I disagree.

Re:Can it be DoS'd?

[gmhowell]

Exactly. My wife has RP, and would take a set of these in a heartbeat. Similarly, she has a cochlear implant. These types of questions were the LAST thing on her mind.

Re:Can it be DoS'd?

[CaffeineAddict2001]

Yes. It's called setting the light switch to off.
It renders the eye useless!

Re:Can it be DoS'd?

[Winged Cat]

So, how do you turn the sun and the moon off? Heck, I've even been able to see by starlight under a new moon...

Re:Can it be DoS'd?

[mother_superius]

But Telnet in my head makes it so much more useful!

That's just great. Really.

[dlek]

It's nice to see technology that really improves people's lives, instead of possibly giving slight and ambiguous gains to their productivity or make it that much easier to send 10-word messages to other people within urban areas. I like advancements in 3d vid cards and such as much as the next guy, but this is what technology's really all about. Helping the blind see again? Excellent. I'd give back the Internet if it would find us a cure for cancer.

imagine having a beowulf cluster of these!

[n4zgl]

(-1, bc troll) "Chow said one patient, who has had the implant for nine months, saw his wife's face for the first time in years. The man, who previously could only see hand motions from four to five feet away, can now see cars from half a block away." a long time coming! cyborg implants enabling supervision look a whole lot closer. One question I would ask a patient is "how does it look?" do you have stereoscopic vision? Augemented 'fly-eye' vision? colour perception? Like a cure for cancer, I think we all know someone who will benefit from this.

Limited Potential

[Jon_Katz (Paranoid F]

While this indeed is a great innovation, we must remember that this has only been tested by people affected by retinitis pigmentosa. Whether the optical implants can be used to restore sight for people from eye injuries or other diseases remains to be seen.

A lowdown on retinitis pigmentosa can be found here.

Re:Limited Potential

[jdavidb]

I wish it could do something for my grandfather's macular degeneration, but I have a feeling a bionic cure for that problem is going to be too far in the future to help.

Re:Limited Potential

[mr_exit]

WOW this is the greatest news I have heard all year.... it has totally made my day.

Ok calm down... explanation time..

I have had retina reatachment surgery 3 times in two years. this is where they take your eyes out, cut open the 6 rows of stiches in each eye and stick the retina back on. They dont know what is causing it (not bungee jumping or a car accident) and everytime it happens my retina gets a little more cut up and i have all sorts of weird stripes through my vision.

Now you my say.. "tough luck, you have bad eyes, live with it" but you see my whole life is based arround my eyes. I am a visual effects artist for the movies (lately 3d modeling on a movie about a ring) my eyes are my livilyhood.

And so the chance that they are one step closer to being able to replace them matters more to me then anything i have heard all year.

So if this is the "limited potential" you are talking about mr katz then i'm not really sorry for getting excited for nothing

Re:Limited Potential

[gleam_mn]

Couldn't agree more... used to work for a company creating Digital Orthophotos for a living. Only problem is doing that requires excellent stereo vision. Throw in a spontaneous retinal detachment and things get ugly really fast. 14 months, 6 surgeries (2 reattachement, one silicon oil removal, 2 lens implants (poor prescription the first time), and one Yagg laser), and a new job later I have a crappy 20/50 vision level in my right eye (crappy 20/30 with reading glasses). At this point it would be tempting to trade in for a shiny new model. Even if they never could reproduce 20/20 vision I would almost settle for replacement with a computer readout (man am I a geek). Why not, my left eye is doing all the work now, the only thing I get from my right eye that's useful is the vision one the far right side where my left eye can't cover. Do I think I'll see this kind of advancement in general use before I'm 60... probably not, but here's hoping.

Re:Limited Potential

[Anonymous Coward]

These experiments have been limited to those stricken blind by RP, and that is a limit, but remember it is the most common cause of blindness. Therefore, it seems like the best place to start. I have RP and I sincerely hope this technology gets a lot better beofre my vision gets much worse.

Yahoo news reporting

[Anonymous Coward]

I am so glad Yahoo is getting out there and interviewing and reporting. I mean it is always a pleausre to see the bright yellow Yahoo! news vans out scouring out any story that can be found.

More Info

[aebrain]

Links to stories on the same subject are here

How it's powered

[martyb]

I was wondering how in the world it was powered. Come to find out, it's just a bunch of tiny solar cells according to
this article at How Stuff Works.
The light coming into the eye is focused on the retina. Solar cells convert light to electricity. Electricity stimulates optic nerves. Voila --Sight!

Re:How it's powered

[BWJones]

Environmental availability of light is not enough. You need to shine the equivalent of about 3X's the suns brightness into the eye to make it work adequately.

Re:How it's powered

[Dirtside]

it's just a bunch of tiny solar cells

So what you're saying is, in order to see, people need to look directly at the sun? Well shit, there goes a thousand years of mom's warnings down the drain.

Only for those who lost their sight

[Hitokage_Nishino]

There is an extremely interesting article in a recent Discover magazine about a man who was blind from the age of 2-3 recieving sight back in one eye thanks to stem cell implants.

While after the operation he physically had 20/20 vision, he actually saw more along the lines of 20/500. The problem wasn't his eye, but his brain. He just hadn't learned how to fully percieve eyesight. One interesting note is that he does not perceive optical illusions. Since he's well past that critical stage of mental development when one is supposed to get it hardwired, he'll have a rough time getting his eyesight anywhere near normal. In fact, several other people who were blind as small children and had similar operations say they would rather be blind now.

At any rate, while this will certainly be a great help to those who lost their sight as adults... it may not be of too much help to those born blind.

Re:Only for those who lost their sight

[Karen_Frito]

Perhaps not blind adults who lost sight as children -- but if this technology is developing sucessfully today ...

Children NOW who lose their sight may never BECOME adults who lost their sight as children.

Lose sight at 5, get chip at 6, return to normal life. (Extremly abridged version, minus all the "Learn to see again" stuff.)

This is a wonderful innovation - even if its not for everyone, its a start. And everything has to start somewhere.

Science as a miracle?

[copponex]

Well, I'm sure you've all thought about it. Science can help the lame walk, help the mute communicate, and now it lets the blind see. I wonder how long the ultra-right can continue condemning science as evil.

Re:Science as a miracle?

[Anonymous Coward]

here here! yeah, this is off-topic, but i wouldn't despise republicans so much if it weren't for that small vocal groupt of, lets face it, "nuts" that have such dramatic influence...

If anybody reading this is a republican politician, take note.

Re:Science as a miracle?

[Anonymous Coward]

dude your user ID is this close to

being "Coupon Sex!"

Re:Science as a miracle?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know any of them who think that science is evil. They oppose things for ethical reasons (not that everyone agrees with their ethical system) and some oppose evolution because they think it's factually wrong (it isn't).

Re:Science as a miracle?

[Canadian Eh]

Even more interesting will be to see the development of a Blind lobby.

There is a Deaf culture lobby, that strenuously objects to parental consent to cochlear (sp?) implants, will we see the rise of a Blind culture lobby as well?

Re:Science as a miracle?

[scjelli]

i wouldn't be too suprised to see that happen, but i would hope not. blind culture and deaf culture are a bit different. With deaf people, they still have the ability to be fully functioning with very few limitations, they can drive, they can watch movies, they can do anything a hearing person can, even dance.
blind people on the other hand, have a much greater disadvantage in our world. They require special interfaces to allow computer access, movies are not generally geared towards blind people, and they require much more assistance if they are to try and shop in places.

bionics?

[phaserx]

bionic eyes to help the blind.. hrmm.. where's the line to sign up and test the bionic penis??

Re:bionics?

[damn dirty ape]

a bionic penis might be dangerous for slashdot readers... too many broken hands testing it out

Re:bionics?

[number one duck]

Its right after the penis-removal line. Can't have it both ways, buddy,

Re:bionics?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or worse.. their dogs.

Re:bionics?

[Anonymous Coward]

They will be limited to laywers, corporate boards, and thier goon squads. They will come with consumer colon tracking devices.

Re:bionics?

[germinatoras]

What I want to know is: What exactly _were_ those hand motions occuring 4 feet away? Have they stopped now that he can see his wife again?

and rush has the bionic ear

[JeanBaptiste]

it is amazing how we live in an age where miracles are commonplace... im not religious, nor did I probably even spell it right. just saying that most of the stuff that jesus did can be done by modern science. Curing the blind (laser cataract sugery), the lame can walk (broken leg)... wouldn't such a thing as 'bionic retinas give patients sight' be regarded as a miracle even 100 years ago?
let me restate, I have no religious affiliation...
I vote lp

Re:and rush has the bionic ear

[Anonymous Coward]

i'm not religious either, nor can I spell worth a crap, but jesus didn't do that "stuff"...

No one can walk on water, make something from nothing, and be without sin in the biblical definition.

Now, Lord Ganesh, the elephant God, he is the REAL god...look him up on google, then, offer him up some milk :)

--just your avarage athiest

unnecessary in most cases

[Anonymous Coward]

Simple nutritional supplementation with taurine, lipoic acid and lutien can prevent such problems. It is also a question of build up of toxins in the body over many years that causes such damage. I am following the program listed at:

www.prestiegepublishing.com

in the book titled "Pain Free". Don't be fooled, this is serious medicine from people who care about health issues. The newsletter is cheap and well worth the read.

Byron Como

Re:unnecessary in most cases

[Anonymous Coward]

Simple nutritional supplementation with taurine, lipoic acid and lutien can prevent such problems.

Yeah, and it can cause others. Taurine has been proven to harden arteries. Too much Lipolic acid can lead to very low levels of blood sugar (very bad if you're diabetic). And making bad suggestions on Slashdot can lead to low Karma.

Re:unnecessary in most cases

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah but the upside is taurine is cheap, it's in cat food...

Re:unnecessary in most cases

[Anonymous Coward]

And what studies are those? Please give date of publication, reasearcher and his institution.

*Taurine has been proven to harden arteries.*

Taurine aides the movement of potassium, sodium, calcium and magnesium in and out ouf your cells, For that reason it has been used to treat congestive heart failure and epileptic seizures.
Barbeau A, Huxtable JR. "Taurine and Neurological Disorders." Raven Press, New York, 1978

*Too much Lipolic acid can lead to very low levels of blood sugar (very bad if you're diabetic)*

Thats lipoic acid we're talking about, i'm not sure if you're confusing it with lipolic acid(whatever that is) or you just can't spell.

Diabetes, again, is the result of nutritional deficiencies, lack of exercise, smoking and years of chemical exposures and can be corrected by supplementation with lipoic acid, fatty acids(cod liver oil), phosphatidyl choline, calcium, vitamin e, vanadium(an insulin mimic), DHEA, B6, glutathion, vitamin c, quercitin, chromium, a diet change.
Estrada DE, Ewart HS, Klip A, et al, Stimulation of glucose uptake by the natural coenzyme a-lipoic acid/thioctic acid: Participation of elements of the insulin signaling pathway. Diabetes 45: 1798-1804, 1996
DeFronzo R, Ferrannini E, Insulin resistance - a multifacedted syndrome responsible for NIDDM, obesity, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, Diabetes Care 1991;4(4):173-94
Zavaroni I, et al, Risk factors for coronary artery disease in healthy persons with hyperinsulinemia and normal glucose tolerance, New Engl J Med 1989;320:702-6
Pyorala M, Miettinen H, Lakso M, Pyorala K, Hyperinsulinemia predicts coronary heart disease risk in health middle-aged men: the 22-year follow-up results in the Finnish Helsinki Policeman Study, Circulation 4;98(5):398-404 1984
Jaakkola K, Lahteenmaki J, Laasko J, Mahlberg K, Treatment with antioxidant and othernutrients in combination with chemotherapy and the radiation in patients with small-cell lung cancer, Anticancer Research 12;3: 599-606, 1992

You didn't mention lutein. Over the counter from Carlson 800-323-4141. Seddon J, at all, Dietary carotenoids, vitamins A, C, and E and advanced age-related macular degeneration, J Amer Med Assoc, 272: 14 13-14 20, 1994

And let's not forget bilberry, available in a product called Vacimyr, by Thorne. Hattersley JG, Avoiding Visual Degeneration, TLfD, Februray/March: 122-1 23, 1999

*And making bad suggestions...*

This is the best medical advice on the subject of protecting eyesight available as of 5/9/2002.

*...on Slashdot can lead to low Karma.*

Your say so has little effect on the function of the cosmos.

An independant confirmation of this info is available in the book "Prescription for Nutritional Healing" by Balch and Balch, Avery Press. (No scientific references though)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/15 83330771/ qid=1020963864/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_1/103-5631420-93686 17

laser surgery....

[idontneedanickname]

a read an article in popsci that mentioned that new laser surgery being done to people with eye-problems, could be applied to people wiht perfect eye-sight to give them up to 20/10 vision!! (which means you see something that's 20 feet away, like it's 10 feet away) Are you thiking what i'm thinking pinky?
--tzan

Re:laser surgery....

[freeweed]

It's a common fallacy to think that 20/20 vision is "perfect", and that anything better is somehow "miraculous". There are many people with better than 20/20 vision. Hell, I used to be one, until I hit puberty and started wearing glasses - really freaked my mom out to be told that I had better than 20/20 vision. Made me feel a bit freakish, truth be told.

Also keep in mind that "seeing something 20 feet away like it's 10 feet away" just means you might see a tiny bit more detail - at 20/20 vision most people can see damn near perfectly out to a LONG distance. Really makes me wonder why someone with 20/20 vision would risk their eyesight just for a marginal improvement.

On this note, anyone remember WHY they chose 20/20 as the standard? Was it arbitrary?

Re:laser surgery....

[negativethirsty]

i have 20/10 vision, its not all that its cracked up to be

Re:laser surgery....

[Jack9]

Your question irked me then made me think. I would figure the reason 20/20 was considered "standard" was probably something along the lines of median statistical data. Start with the premise that 20/20 vision is the most commmon. 20/20 being a ratio that easily describes statistically common vision accuities. 20/20 IMPLIES that there can be better as well as worse kinds of vision, but that they are simply anomalous (not in a bad way).

Re:laser surgery....

[BatesMethod]

Anyone considering laser surgery should be aware that refractive surgery is not foolproof. Reportedly, some overzealous LASIK surgery mills have even neglected to provide patients with adequate information for informed consent, as available on the FDA LASIK site. In addition, the cornea generally heals (scars) very slowly, so the long term (10-20 year) consequences of some of the newer forms of refractive surgery may not yet be fully understood.

Fortunately, natural techniques are available that may be able to help people improve blurred eyesight caused by problems such as myopia or astigmatism. For further information on the topic of natural eyesight improvement, a good starting point is the ISEE website.

Re:laser surgery....

[King_TJ]

Right. One of my good friends is an opthamologist and she says she's shocked at all the LASIK surgery advertisements running on the radio these days. They never come out and tell you all of the facts, such as the 1% risk of going totally blind from the procedure.

1% may not sound like much, but that's hardly worse than your odds of winning $5 or $10 in one of those McDonalds peel-and-win games on the french-fry boxes....

I would definitely think twice before gambling with my vision like that.

Re:laser surgery....

[lukesl]

One of my med school professors is the ophthalmologist for the Yankees (IIRC...a major league baseball team, anyway). He told us that he went and did eye tests on the whole team, and their average eyesight was 20/7.5, meaning that at 20 feet they can see what a person with 20/20 vision can see at 7.5 feet. I think that's insane.

More technical details

[martyb]

There's much more detail on the history, design, and development of the device in this EE times article. I was especially struck by how they persevered. They started on this in 1990 and things did not go entirely smoothly:

"There were 50 to 75 major hurdles from the time we started," Vincent Chow said. "The biocompatibility side represented probably 40 percent of the issues. The other 60 percent were really in the electrical performance of our structures. That's because the final stimulation is an ionic stimulation. We're basically trying to interface a solar structure so that the microcurrents produced by the solar cell have a very high efficiency or functionality factor to stimulate the cells that are touching these particular areas."

This version of the device contains about 3500 light detecting cells. If this version works out okay, they are planning to develop a much larger version of the chip.

If the ASR chip is successful in restoring some degree of vision, Optobionics will make modifications to a final and significantly larger chip design. Some possible ideas, said Alan Chow, include placing openings in the chip to allow nourishment to flow between the outer and inner retina; and changing the direction of the electrical stimulation on an ongoing basis, a technique referred to as biphasic stimulation.

Next step.. the "Being John Malkovich webcam"

[willpost]

$200 for 15 minutes

What happens at night?

[TBHiX]

I mean, I'm sure these things must build up some kind of reserve -- they wouldn't be practical otherwise -- but exactly how much light is required to charge up? Would a low-light condition (say, street lighting in a quiet neighborhood) be too low? Is so, how long before the eyes stop functioning?

Still, interesting stuff.

Can you imagine...

[Rui del-Negro]

...a beowulf cluster of these?

(well, someone had to say it)

I wonder how long it'll take until we see NVidia and ATI try to sell us this kind of thing...

RMN
~~~

Re:Can you imagine...

[YrWrstNtmr]

I wonder how long it'll take until we see NVidia and ATI try to sell us this kind of thing...

It'll be Zeiss and Nikon. Optics, not graphics.

Re:Can you imagine...

[Rui del-Negro]

Nikon and Zeiss already sell lenses. But the retina is more like a CCD. So maybe it'll be Foveon or Casio.

But that's only stage one (for people who want to see what's there). For "enhanced" vision you'll need a "Visual Processor" (hm... 3Dlabs...? :)

RMN
~~~

Ahhh

[kissmyasm]

So how long before spyware comes with your retinas so that other people can monitor what you see? I'm all for medical breakthroughs, but what about privacy? I dunno... guess I'm too paranoid...

Re:Ahhh

[Anonymous Coward]

Now people really could have eyes in the back of their heads.

Buthow can you understand the signal from the eye? How would you get access to it?

they are already advertising it here

[Edmund Blackadder]

Avery morning on the radio i hear some baseball or football player explain how he got eye surgery and now his sight is better than 20/20 and it really improves his game.

I would be really scared to go under the knife for unnecassary thing though. God might get mad that i am not happy with what he gave me and send me some complications.

Or worse yet...

[I.T.R.A.R.K.]

...overlaid advertising. Good luck finding a popup killer for that kind of software.
Or imagine being turned away at the airport because your implants don't have DRM implemented. ;p~

Re:Or worse yet...

[Winged Cat]

It's been said that the DRM battles will continue until wetware gets good enough that the music companies can force installation of DRM modules into everyone's brains. It think those who say that underestimate the amount of brain hacking that will go on even then? ("Windows on the Brain? No, I use OpenThought. I've got it set to claim Windows compatibilitiy, so I can get through all the security checkpoints, but it doesn't actually limit my thoughts.")

Solar powered humans...

[Anonymous Coward]

See the Australian Greenhouse Office website.

Now for the opposite...

[da cog]

Okay, so we can now fix our retinas' ability to receive light. That's all fine and dandy, but what I want to know is: How long until we have the technology to send light back out?

I want implants in my eyes that let me shoot laser beams at people!

Is having my own little Stare o' Death too much to ask for?

Stevie Wonder?

[line-bundle]

Here is an old link to his eye thing. Here

As I just took a final over this...

[PhilosopherKing]

Yes, 20/20 is mostly arbitrary. The neumerator denotes the distance (in feet) the test is given at. (Usually 10 feet, but they use a mirror to double the distance to the standard 20 feet.) The denominator denotes the distance (in feet) at which the critical feature of the letters/numbers/shapes subtends one minute of visual angle. (Is that not a A answer, I'll find out on Friday)

Re:As I just took a final over this...

[digitalcowboy]

(Is that not a A answer, I'll find out on Friday)

The neumerator denotes the distance (in feet) the test is given at.

I liked your post and would have probably moderated it up as "+1 Informative" myself, had I moderator points.

However, it's lucky for you the test you vaguely refer to is not on English or Grammar. Your post could be AN A answer. I guess we'll all find out on Friday. (AT WHICH time you will receive your grade, I presume. :-)

Re:As I just took a final over this...

[BatesMethod]

The reason for using a distance of 20 feet is to test distance vision. It's widely accepted that, at distances closer than 20 feet, the eye somehow "accomodates" for the close distance, but at 20 feet (6 meters) and beyond, the eye is at rest.

Here's a brief explanation of the Snellen chart typically used to test distance vision. Indeed, the critical features of each letter, etc. subtend one minute of visual angle; a whole letter subtends five minutes of visual angle.

Re:As I just took a final over this...

[PhilosopherKing]

Spanked by the grammar police. Ouch, my tookus! On top of getting an B on the final no less.

Re: prOn

[fferreres]

Well, i can think of a remote thingy that wouldn't bother me much. Imagine how much fun you could have had at class: looking at the board and teacher but seen some great pr0n "internally" :)

Talk about unthankfulness

[xcomputer_man]

From the article:

"For another patient, though, the implant has been a bit sobering, Chow said. The patient, who has begun to recognize faces, was disappointed to see how his own face had aged."

I can almost hear those doctors now. "Dude. You've been blind for many years, you were chosen to have your sight restored by a groundbreaking scientific process, and the only thing you can think about is how old you are?

Get back on that operating table, I'm gonna yank that damn chip out your eye..."

THIS IS GREAT

[Nobody's Hero]

I don't know about you guys but this is deffinetly a step in the right direction. How close are we coming to creating synthetic eyeballs. Imagine people who have lost thier eyes might actually be able to see in the near future.

If the electric impulses that are interprutted by the brain as sight, touch, etc. can be harnessed think about the newest forms os prosthetic hands android hands that actually work!!! this is fabulous....

I can hardly wait to see more on this subject!!!

Bionic Man

[cliffy2000]

I'm rather pleasantly surprised that no one has made a Steve "6 Million Dollar Man" Austin reference yet. I mean... the word "BIONIC" was in the title. Could it be possible that the Slashdot reading masses are living up to the intelligent reputation of nerds? Or am I just overthinking this? ...it's a synthesis of both.

Re:Bionic Man

[Anonymous Coward]

No. But it is VERY probable that a particular poster (with an ID of 185461) is living up to the reputation of the intelligence (lack thereof) of a slashbot.

Well, Mr. Reading-Comprehension-of-a-two-year-old, I've seen a few dozen "6 Million Dollar Man" references, all of whom posted before you did.

Re:Help!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Eat more and get some bionic eyes emplanted on your ass-cheeks.

Isn't It Obvious?

[dupper]

They named it after the Television show, of course!

Reporting from ARVO

[BWJones]

OK, I am one of the scientists here at ARVO (Association for Research and Vision in Ophthalmology), and was present at the presentation of Dr. Chow.

I for one would love to believe in the results, but I have not seen any real scientific proof that these things work as advertised. While the video of patients was impressive and touching, there is very little hard science behind the development of the bionic retina and how it is integrating into the retinal environment. The only thing that everyone appears to be reporting on is that the chip is not rejected. And there are other more fundamental issues at work. For one, the silicon retinas require the equivalent of 3X's the brightness of the sun to activate the device and for realistic performace, they would require an external power source. The other issue is that the retinal circuitry that they are placing this bionic implant onto is severely degenerated and remodeled in these patients and may continue to degenerate further, thus complicating matters. That said, there is some indication that the surgery itself may cause some retinal rescue, not the implant. This is something they have not done control experiments on. Furthermore, the generation of low voltage current from the implant in the retina may be promoting retinal recovery of sorts while the silicon retina may not be doing anything for vision itself.

We are still a looooong ways away from the idea of a bionic retina and I think that retinal implants will actually be the least effective method in the long run. Gene therapy, viral infective methods, stem cells, and post retinal bionics will probably work optimally sooner.

Re:Reporting from ARVO

[Winged Cat]

Just to clarify: "post retinal bionics" is something like taking out the entire eye - retina, eyeball, and all - and replacing it with a prosthetic, right? (Which should be easier to control for: compare to surgeries which took out the eyeball, did something to it - say, sewing up tears in the retina - and put it back, for patients with the same condition as said surgery was intended to correct.)

Re:Reporting from ARVO

[lukesl]

I used to work on visual system neurophysiology, and I just want to say that I agree completely about the long-term future of retinal implants. People with a lot of exposure to electronics and computer technology and very little exposure to real biological science (e.g. the average /. reader) have a strong tendency to think that we will be able to replace or improve upon biology. However, most biological systems are already running at a much higher efficiency than pretty much anything humans have ever been able to build. For example, the retina can go out on a bright sunlit day and look at stuff, then go into a dark room and 30 minutes later be fully adapted to SINGLE PHOTON SENSITIVITY. This is an extremely complex process that occurs at the level of the retina--it's not just your pupil changing size. Another thing is that there is retinal circuitry for anticipation of movement. If you work out the math, a person's waving arm can travel 2-3 feet by the time the signal gets from your retina to occipital cortex in your brain, yet you perceive its position accurately because of compensatory mechanisms all the way down to the level of the retina. No artificial retina design has even begun to think about stuff like that.

I'm no expert on CCDs, PMTs, etc., but I seriously doubt that the technology to build an artificial device capable of that yet implantable in the eye will be available in my lifetime. Putting new cells in the retina, on the other hand, will most likely be possible in less than 25 years. Which are patients going to prefer?

Re:Reporting from ARVO

[BWJones]

Just to clarify: "post retinal bionics" is something like taking out the entire eye - retina, eyeball, and all - and replacing it with a prosthetic, right?

No, Post retinal bionics are conceptually bionic plug-ins that use the pre-existing retinal ganglion cell axons to wire up to the brain thus bypassing the retina. The axons would probably have to be severed to keep from corrupting the circuits, but the eyeball would remain intact. Removing eyes and then putting them back in does not happen.

Re:Reporting from ARVO

[pz]

Adding my two cents here, having seen an earlier presentation by Dr. Chow -- who works for a private company with definitely closed-source style operations -- the issue of phototoxicity is severe. Dr. Chow failed to mention in his impressive presentation that the light levels required to make these artificial retinas work is toxic to the cells. And since the rods and cones are dead already, all that is left in these diseased retinas are *non*-light-sensitive cells! He admitted this during the questioning period, but strongly downplayed it. For me, the point is that there's a simple power analysis which makes it pretty clear a passive device such as Dr. Chow's will never, ever work: action potentials take a lot of energy to trigger from a non-synaptic input like an external current source, and there aren't enough photons in normal light levels to do this.

While I think the ideas he presents are elegant and show promise, they are not done in the normal light of open scientific research, and thus must be scruitinzed with higher levels of suspicion.

Re:Reporting from ARVO

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, cmon that's no fun! You'd definitely need to whip the eyeballs out and mod them.

How about telephoto eyeballs?

Or maybe cartoorn-like eyeballs on springs - that'd be useful for lookign down chicks' cleavage!

Forget night-vision and think about the NOW

[Trillian_1138]

While I'm as excited as the next geek about super-vision, seeing in the dark, zoomable eyes, and the like, an easier place to start is what this technology can do for people in the near futures.

First off, the article said there was evidence the implants were actualy stimulating surrounding cells. This is just cool. Hopefully, this means the tiny, tiny implants will have a domino effect on vision: the cells directly surrounding the implants begin working, stimulating the next surrounding layer, stimulating the *next* surrounding layer, stimulating...well, you get the picture. It would be wonderful to think that, in a few years, the next generation of this technology will be able to help people recover 100% of their vision. But even *more* wonderful to think that the *very first test patients* might get something approaching full vision in a few months with the very first test run.

The other thought I had which is a little more down to Earth than 'super-zoomable implants with night vision, only $1.99!!' is the effect this could have on children. I can only imagine how horrible loosing your vision, and knowing it will continue to deteriorate as your life goes on. But the article's implication seemed to be all these patients had, at one time, full vision. What about children who lost their vision? Or never had it? I think it'd be that much more impressive if a child who'd never seen a rainbow, or a butterfly, or a Slashdotted website, or a line of computer code...

While there are *fabulous* applications of this technology that might come sometime down the road, I think tere's just as cool stuff waiting right across the street.

Just my $.02

------

Cyborgs?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are electronic arm/leg surgical implants (paralisys), bionic eyes, artificial hearts, tons of plastic surgeries. Now all we need is a penis-lengthening method that works! Of course, when that happens we will no longer have blood flowing through our bodies or nerve endings. So what's the point?

yea, but...

[nutty]

Why stop at two?

imagine a BEOWULF cluster of these!
=D

/nutt

The INTERNET might help us find a cancer cure.

[Artifice_Eternity]

I'd give back the Internet if it would find us a cure for cancer.

Forget giving it back... having it is more likely to find us a cure.

Think of all the communication and collaboration that is now possible between researchers around the world. And think of the various distributed computing projects, that use Net-connected PCs to crunch numbers for biomedical research and other causes.

Maybe not for current adult patients

[jeko]

But for future infants born blind, getting this device in early enough might allow the needed development.

awesome, just like the game ...

[PaganRitual]

this is cool ... now i can actually live out all the thief2, blood2 and deus ex fantasies i have had about bionic eyes ...

oh yeah, and can i also attach one to the top of my shoe and then walk around holding my foot underneath girls dresses???
dropping coins is so nineties ...

So much for La Forge

[slideshot]

I take it this means there won't be any engineers wearing that weird visor thing on Galaxy class star ships anytime soon

Re:That's just great. Really.

[Rolo Tomasi]

I'd give back the Internet if it would find us a cure for cancer.

I just wondered, what would happen if we could cure all diseases and everyone would live 120 years. In most western countries the population is declining, because children are an inconvenience to people. So we would have a population of really old people. The social systems wouldn't be able to cope with this, people would have to work until they're 100. And how is your life going to look like? Would those 40 years from 80 to 120 be fun? Ever been to a retirement home and seen the people there?

Furthermore, with so many old people, health insurance would be very expensive, so probably only the richest would able to afford treatment beyond 80 years of age.

Maybe you could circumvent the problem if you had rigorous birth control, so that exactly the right number of children is born. This would mean forcing people to have children - doesn't sound like a friendly place to live in to me.

What's more important? Quality of life or quantity?

Now, I'm not advocating the stopping of research on cancer or anything, but I'm really wondering what a solution to these problems could look like.

night vision

[bluprint]

I want night vision. Then I can actually BE an elf.

Seriously, you can bet your ass I would have night vision eye implants...

Bionic Retina picture

[Nathdot]

Here's a link to the bionic retina implants in action.

Progress

[DarkHelmet]

Well, anything's better than having to wear a woman's hairpiece over your eyes.

Sobering Thoughts

[hyrdra]

Isn't amazing how fast technology moves? Remember Jordy from Star Trek? He used that big visor thing to restore his vision, and this is what writers thought would be the technology in the 24th century. Here we are in 2002, and we have a solar powered eye chip that can be implanted into the eye to give people some of their sight back, with no discomfort.

Sure, it isn't perfect and it's only version .1 but as others have mentioned how long before this changes and version 4.0 is out with default 20/15 vision and zoom controls?

Just step back and realize what an accomplishment this is and how fast technology changes everyday. It's almost scary to think what life will be like when I turn 60.

Reminds me of something my Great Grandfather said: "I've seen the world come from stage coach to walking on the moon; nobody will ever lead that kind of life again."

Well if this is the case I would think the rate of progression will disprove this. It's amazing to think we will all outlive the advancements that occured during his lifetime, but we probably will.

This article just reaffirms that notion.

Re:Sobering Thoughts

[Morgoth_Bauglir]

Was Geordi's vision restored? I thought he was blind since birth.

If I am correcet in that memory, then he was given sight he never had, which would be a much bigger deal.

Once again... real science beats Star Trek

[Aqua OS X]

Once again... real science beats Star Trek's proposed date and time for new toys :)

Re:Once again... real science beats Star Trek

[Anonymous Coward]

So then where the hell is my flying car?

Reminds me of an older story...

[3Suns]

ah. here it is.

And a the patients says:

[AeiwiMaster]

Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated !

Control Experiments may not be Ethical

[kris_lang]

Good luck trying to get appropriate control experiments past the IRBs (institute review boards) and Commitees on Human experimentation. The most appropriate control experiments may be a bit dangerous and have greater risk than benefits.

As for control experiments, Neurosurgeons got a lot of people up in arms for doing sham surgery as control experiments in fetal cell transplantation for alleviating Parkinson's Disease. The initial reason for doing the control experiments was the same as this: Is the mucking around in the retina itself, rather than the presence of the implant, responsible for the rescue response? The only way to tell would be to muck around and pretend to implant something but not leave anything in there. This can lead to severe complications. Even just doing a sham burr hole for the Neurosurgical controls, or even a partial burr hole which does not penetrate all of the skull, would create the risk of infection.

Post Retinal Bionics would be good for someone with a functional retina and perhaps a ganglionic or pigmented epithelium problem such as Retinitis Pigmentosa. They would not be much good for those with photoreceptor, horizontal, amacrine, bipolar, or ganglionic cell problems, eh? I agree that we are definitely a LONG way away from retinal implants being as functional and as routine as cochlear implants currently are. And the current cochlear implants are not so impressive considering what Mother Nature gives us.

Re: Troll?!?

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF?!? Moderator have no sense of humour... Anyway, I always toutgh that moderating someone as troll is directly in contradiction to the free speech preached here... Very bad

they got the name wrong

[Morgoth_Bauglir]

Chew, if only you could see what I've seen with your eyes.

OT: Re:Science as a miracle?

[ckaminski]

Hear hear!

Let's face it. Mankind is it's own God.

Arbitrary?

[mindstrm]

20 feet is just a practical number I guess. Whether I can see detail past 20 feet isn't as important to daily functioning.

20/10 woudl not mean 'a tiny bit more detail'.. it would mean I can read things twice as far away as I can now.

Hmmm

[Some Blonde]

In order for someone with one of these implants to be able to tell you how it looks or if it's like "fly vision", they would have to be someone who can recall having previously had normal sight. Otherwise, they wouldn't have any basis for comparison.

Re:That's just great. Really.

[Winged Cat]

Hang around for another 50 years or so. That's where it looks like we're headed.

What's more important? Quality of life or quantity?

Quantity of sufficiently good life. I reject both a short but full life and a long but dull life. I want, and will claim for myself, a long (infinite if possible) life full of doing what I want to do. Merely extending life is not the answer; the answer is extending active life, making it so you don't have to "retire" into boredom (even working 'til I drop dead would be better than the purgatory of a mindless retirement home, though I would of course prefer more freedom to work on what I want without needing to worry about money).

I have RP, this gives me new hope

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a true first - an article on slashdot bringing me to tears. RP is a devestating disease. I'm only in my early/mid twenties and I'm legally blind from retinitis pigmentosa. My vision deterioriates every year as I lose more and more peripheral vision. You'd be amazed by all of the simple acts that the sighted take for granted.

I can only hope that this research will continue and one day the technology will be available for everyone with RP. I doubt that I'd have to think twice if the optical implants were offered to me.