Slashdot Mirror
Need A New Retina? Look No Further
wap writes "Restoring sight to the blind is a Bibical miracle, a sign of divine powers. Now it is being tested at the Boston Retinal Implant Project, with some very limited success, according to Technology Review. They only have fifteen electrodes implanted, but it's a start. Great quotes: 'The eye doesn't like stuff inside it, that's why it doesn't have a zipper.' Will artificial eyes and retinal replacements someday be as good as good human eyes?"
Some info about the various types of bionic eyes currently being built can be found on Wired.
Brain implant anyone?
Read Pynchon.
Just some clarification.
These devices won't restore eyesight to people who were born blind. Only those who, at one time in their life, actually could see will profit from such technical replacements.
When you are born you are nearly blind. It takes four to six years for the visual cortex to develop fully. After the age of six this development stops and thats the end of it.
If you are born blind then the cortex will not be trained and no magic eye surgery will restore your vision, because after the age of six the visual cortex will no longer adapt to the new situation.
Even if your eyes are restored to 20/20 vision you will not see a thing because your vision center doesn't know how to interpret the pictures. So these kinds of surgery will only help people which went blind and not those who were born blind. (Still cool stuff)
BTW. It is the same with deafness.
Why replace your real eye to do this if it is perfectly healthy? Take a look at EyeTap. This research, mainly by Professor Steve Mann at the University of Toronto has the potential to do everything you describe, and much more besides!
Disclaimer: I meant what I thought, not what I wrote! What? You can't read my Mind? Oh dear!
The night vision problem is caused by the way the surgery is performed, and it depends on which type of surgery is carried out. The problem that is caused is a "starburst" effect around the point where the front of the eye is opened and re-sealed, or around the points where modifications have been made to the eye.
Usually these effects wear off after a couple of weeks, and some people never experience them at all, but for a minority of patients, they are left with a permanent "starburst" effect, which is worst in any high-contrast light-on-dark situation, such as driving at night.
The problem is serious enough that some governments have banned any person who has had laser eye surgery from driving at all - which is annoying for those who had their vision corrected to bring it into the range acceptable for driving in the first place!
Disclaimer: I meant what I thought, not what I wrote! What? You can't read my Mind? Oh dear!
It just corrects flaws in the lenses, which should make all types of vision better. Anyone? I'm considering it, that's why I'm interested.
It doesn't "correct flaws in the lenses". It has no effect on the eye's anatomical part called a"lens". Typical near/far sightedness isn't caused by any geometric flaws, but rather by the eye's inability to refocus the "baseline" position of the lens due to skeletal changes forcing geometry changes of the eyeball. Astigmatism is due to corneal flaw in shape but the cornea is still perfect in terms of surface. Contrary to some myths, it is not due to muscle problems, it's that the lens isn't anywhere it needs to be where the muscles can do some good. Laser surgery cuts away at the cornea to change the refractivity of it so that the lens' accomodation range is back in the active area for the optical system consisting of cornea, lens, retina (the same way contact lenses and glasses work).
These cuts cause flaws. In addition, the contrast and reflectivity of the cornea is adversely affected. It is still much better than the older techniques. What some people forget is that laser surgery is still surgery. It is still butchery, its just that the laser is relatively more precise and allows smaller scale cuts than a knife.
6 months ago I had cataract sugery and an interocular implant. The implant is fantastic, it took me from functionaly blind, in that eye, to pretty usable vision in the eye.
There is absolutely no equal to the organic material of the eye, though. As good as the implant is, it's still like looking at a bad reprint of a picture.
When it comes to the human body, third party products are decent if you can't get the real thing. But, they really aren't (and probably won't be) better.
[This sig left intentionally blank.]