Slashdot Mirror


DNA Computer Detects, Treats Disease

Arthur Dent '99 writes "According to this article at Reuters, Israeli scientists at the Weizmann Institute have developed a DNA computer which can automatically detect and treat prostate cancer and a form of lung cancer in laboratory experiments. Theoretically, a person could be injected with this computer, and it would detect and treat any diseased cells at the earliest stages of development, perhaps preventing the disease altogether."

28 of 183 comments (clear)

  1. I have to wonder... by wookyhoo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...what happens if the computer gets a virus?

    1. Re:I have to wonder... by merdark · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then you get a virus.

      I hate to break it to you, but we *already* get lots of cell viruses. Like the flu for example.

      Besides, the research is far away from actually doing what the headline suggests. For now, they are trying to make something that can even *detect* a particular type of diseased cell.

      Other questions about safty would be, are these computers capable of reproducing? I haven't yet read the literature on this, but I'd guess no. They do not use typical virus mechanics for one, and they are nowhere close to being a complete cell. If they can't reproduce, even if they did go haywire and start destroying cells willy nilly, there would only be so many of them in your body to do so. Treatmet could easily be stopped as soon as the first hint of ill effects are noticed.

    2. Re:I have to wonder... by wookyhoo · · Score: 5, Funny

      For some reason I have the following image in my head. Blame it on it being 8:40am and me having spent the last 16hrs working, if you will.

      Dave returns from hospital.
      Dave is feeling better.
      Dave sits down in his comfortable chair to watch the television.
      Dave relaxes.
      Dave looks confused as his hand all of a sudden starts moving, finds a piece of paper, and writes "Buy Cheerios!!!" on it.
      Dave curses, "Damn it".
      Dave looks even more confused as he stands up, walks towared the phone, and makes a phonecall to a number that his hand doesn't allow him to see.
      Dave whispers something into the phone, and then sits back down in his chair.
      Dave curses again, "Damn spyware" :/

    3. Re:I have to wonder... by Gilgaron · · Score: 5, Interesting

      More concerning would be whether or not they would induce an immune response.

      Immunopathology can be as mundane as allergy symptoms or as severe as shock.

      If you were treated with these computers in one instance they could cure you, but you could develop antibodies against them. Later upon receiving a second treatment you could induce large scale inflammatory responses.

  2. Ouch, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Would be a bit hard to swallow. I hope it's at least one of those small form factor [i.e. shuttle PC] designs.

    1. Re:Ouch, by Kenja · · Score: 5, Funny
      "Would be a bit hard to swallow. I hope it's at least one of those small form factor [i.e. shuttle PC] designs."

      Good news! Its a suppository.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  3. May sound like a joke... by ItMustBeEsoteric · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But wouldn't this make the concept of a computer virus horrifying?

    1. Re:May sound like a joke... by Goalie_Ca · · Score: 4, Insightful

      IF you think about it, this DNA computer is a virus infecting bad cells.

      --

      ----
      Go canucks, habs, and sens!
    2. Re:May sound like a joke... by ItMustBeEsoteric · · Score: 4, Interesting

      True. I remember reading in a bit of Sci-Fi called The Miracle Strain by Michael Cordy about how, in the future once machines had advanced enough to decode each person's genome super fast, to the point of reconstructing a life-like image from their DNA in a few seconds, they had basically gotten to the point of using retroviral factors to transmit DNA changes throughout the body.

      On the non-Sci-Fi note, HIV is probably the best to do this, because once it's stripped of the naughty bits you have a very powerful retrovirus, the most powerful in nature. Of course, at this point it's not practical yet, but it's probably the best way to go about changing DNA, that we can dream up for now anyway.

    3. Re:May sound like a joke... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes you're absolutely right. In fact according to the second page of the article, normal viruses as we know them are the "DNA computer viruses" you're talking about. They're essentially just strings of nucleotides...

      When I saw the article title I thought, "Wow, DNA COMPUTER!" It's not quite a misnomer, but that name is certainly misleading. These computers don't have any hardware or non-organic components--they're basically just prearranged nucleotide sequences.

      The concept is interesting nonetheless; these are computers in the sense that they function as finite automata. Anybody remember taking Computability in college? =)

    4. Re:May sound like a joke... by Kelz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      once it's stripped of the naughty bits you have a very powerful retrovirus, the most powerful in nature.

      That we know of!

    5. Re:May sound like a joke... by wuice · · Score: 4, Funny

      Does that mean we get to fuck diseases out of existence? Sexually transmitted diseases call for sexually transmitted cures.

  4. Uhhhhhhhh by WwWonka · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...developed a DNA computer which can automatically detect and treat prostate cancer

    That computer had damn well be running a stable version of Linux if it is operating on/near/in my colon!

    Somehow knowing that a Windows machine could give me the "brown screen of death" doesn't sit easy with me!

  5. Microscopic Computer? by thrillbert · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is Dennis Quaid driving it?

    ---
    There's a fine line between courage and foolishness. Too bad it's not a fence.

  6. oss by theguywhosaid · · Score: 5, Funny

    i for one, welcome our new closed source gene modifying software overlords

  7. Take your pick from these lame comments by Linker3000 · · Score: 4, Funny
    • Imagine a beowulf cluster of these inside you
    • All your cells are belong to us
    • Wow, imagine being infected with spyware and so everywhere you looked a little box with a penis enlargement ad appeared in the top right hand corner of your vision
    • Then SCO claims the system uses some of their code and they now OWN YOUR ASS
    --
    AT&ROFLMAO
  8. Earlier... by antic · · Score: 4, Funny


    Thank god they didn't invent this earlier! Injecting computers... shit, computers used to be huge! Now they'd just be sticking a midi-tower into your stomach...

    Oh wait, that's going to explain the size of the average geek; they've been onto this for years!

    --
    'Thats they exact same thing a banana wrench monkey.'
  9. What if DNA computer goes crazy? by pyrrhonist · · Score: 4, Funny
    This could be a bad thing:

    "Hal, please open my bladder sphincter."

    "Sorry, Dave, I can't do that."

    *pop!* *splotsh!*

    --
    Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
  10. Prostate Street by tverbeek · · Score: 4, Funny
    That computer had damn well be running a stable version of Linux if it is operating on/near/in my colon!

    While your prostate is in the general neighborhood of your colon, you might want to be more concerned about certain other organs and glands that are more directly connected to it. I'd be less worried about a colonic BSOD, than with an inability to boot, or a poorly-timed abnormal termination.

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  11. Think of the Maintenance Schedule by MooseByte · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Theoretically, a person could be injected with this computer, and it would detect and treat any diseased cells at the earliest stages of development..."

    Oh great, so keeping up with the latest virus defs will finally be a literal pain in the ass too....

  12. "Computer" is Misnomer by Kevin+Nichols · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Calling it a computer is a bit of a misnomer. It's a molecule that recognizes the presences of a specific signal to release a payload. That's it. It is of course a clever trick, but the word "computer" is just a device used by the science journalists to make it sound more interesting.

  13. No, this is the joke by cachorro · · Score: 5, Funny

    One day, in line at the company cafeteria, Jack says to Mike behind him, "My elbow hurts like hell. I guess I better see a doctor. " "Listen, don't waste time," Mike replies. "There's a diagnostic computer down at Asda. Just give it a urine sample and the computer'll tell you what's wrong and what to do about it. It takes ten seconds and costs five pounds. . . a lot quicker and better than a doctor. " So Jack deposits a urine sample in a small jar and takes it to Asda.

    He deposits five pounds, and the computer lights up and asks for the urine sample. He pours the sample into the slot and waits.

    Ten seconds later, the computer ejects a printout: "You have tennis elbow. Soak your arm in warm water and avoid heavy activity. It will improve in two weeks"

    That evening while thinking how amazing this new technology was, Jack began wondering if the computer could be fooled. He mixed some tap water, a stool sample from his dog, urine samples from his wife and daughter, and masturbated into the mixture for good measure. Jack hurries back to Asda, eager to check the results. He deposits five pounds, pours in his concoction, and awaits the results. The computer prints the following:

    1. Your tap water is too hard. Get a water softener.
    2. Your dog has ringworm. Bathe him with anti-fungal shampoo.
    3. Your daughter has a cocaine habit. Get her into rehab.
    4. Your wife is pregnant. Twins. They aren't yours. Get a lawyer.
    5. If you don't stop playing with yourself, your elbow will never get better. and thank you for shopping at Asda.

  14. Links to original article ... by lucare · · Score: 5, Informative

    Instead of reading a vague description of their results try the following two links:

    Summary from Nature's website
    Original Aritcle in Nature

    Bill

  15. Why doesn't anyone here understand... by cr0sh · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ...what they have done?

    If this story is true, then these researchers may have unlocked a "secret" that is incredible in scope: They have learned (in a limited manner) how to code in DNA - they have hacked nature's UTM.

    Such a discovery and the applications of its use would lead to incredible things - both for good and ill! Incredible "cures" and horrific weapons all at once! Instant death and neverending life at our fingertips! In some ways - I think this may have come too soon, and will end up killing off life on this planet - we can't even agree to disagree on our religion (never mind the fact that religion is nothing more than mythology and fantasy for grown adults), instead choosing to kill ourselves over which invisible man in the sky is better!

    DNA (and the attendent processes for its replication - heliocase, RNA primase, DNA polymerase, etc) is nothing more than a long UTM program "tape", where the GATC are the symbols for the program - and this "tape" controls the rest of the processes in the cell (ok, if you have followed this long - you can see I am *not* a biologist by any means - I likely have some things very incorrect).

    I don't know - I may be wrong - but this just seems incredible (if true)...

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon
    1. Re:Why doesn't anyone here understand... by BigBadBri · · Score: 5, Informative
      No - they already had a simple 'yes/no' sort of automaton.

      What they have done, which is cool, clever and generally admirable, is to add an input (detect protein A, or RNA strand B, etc.) that triggers an appropriate output (synthesise protein C, or make enzyme D to release drug E).

      This is incredibly powerful - indeed it is 90% of the way to the 'magic bullet' that was the grail of cancer research a few years back (there's no method for delivery into the cell yet, but I'm sure a viroid shell for anti-cancer drugs is possible), and the guys deserve a Nobel prize for this if it lives up to its potential.

      --
      oh brave new world, that has such people in it!
    2. Re:Why doesn't anyone here understand... by tfoss · · Score: 4, Insightful
      What they have done, which is cool, clever and generally admirable, is to add an input (detect protein A, or RNA strand B, etc.) that triggers an appropriate output (synthesise protein C, or make enzyme D to release drug E).

      While I agree what they've done is cool and clever, your comment (as well as the linked article, and even the paper itself) are somewhat overstating the actual accomplishment. The original Nature paper this refers to is pretty confusing as it really tries to keep the computer analogy up throughout the whole thing. As best as I can decipher through a quick read-through (and IAABiochemist), they synthesized some long single-stranded DNA molecules. Period. The clever part about it was designing a sequence that, when bound to certain mRNA molecules, will present a known restriction enzyme cleavage site. The restriction enzyme cleaves at that site, and the resultant, shorter molecule can repeat this with a different mRNA molecule. Wash rinse repeat.

      This system, and mind you, this is only a model system created in a test tube, free of all the myriad cellular components that might muck it up, only involves inputs and outputs that are small nucliec acids. They do nothing to synthesize, make, or create any proteins (or drugs in the typical sense). The "drug" in this case, is simply a short strand of ssDNA that can prevent the translation of a specific mRNA sequence. The fact that you can do that is, in itself, tremendously cool and potentially therapeutically useful, but is far from novel.

      My beef with this it that, while in the strictest sense it might be a "computer," that is a loaded word that implies far more than this research actually delivers. It is a computer in the same sense that the door lock on your car is. It can distinguish a pre-designed set of inputs (certain mRNA sequences vs. a certain set of hills and valleys on your key), and react by either doing something (get cleaved to release a toxic DNA sequence vs. allowing you to physically turn the lock) or not. So, while a novel application of nucleic acid binding, all this talk of 'inputs, computation modules, logical control, and autonomous biomolecular computers' is mostly fluff. (Granted, to get published in Nature or Science you generally need a level of such fluff).

      -Ted

      --
      -=-=- Quantum physics - the dreams stuff are made of.
  16. Re:But... by BigBadBri · · Score: 4, Informative
    Cancer, just like any other disease is evolving and will evolve...

    Sorry to sound abrupt, but evolving? Evolving my arse.

    Cancer isn't an organism, it's a fairly well defined malfunction in various types of cell in your body - which don't tend to evolve at all these days, due to the lack of selection pressure.

    Only a few cancers can be characterised by excess RNA or by specific marker proteins at present - that's why they have concentrated on prostrate cancer and a form of lung cancer for their proof-of-concept. As more markers are identified, this method will become more generally applicable, and you'll eventually be able to have an annual 'anti-cancer shot' that will be much the same from year to year, except for having additional cancers added to it.

    --
    oh brave new world, that has such people in it!
  17. Even better links to original article ... by zAmb0ni · · Score: 4, Informative