Slashdot Mirror


Smart Optical Fibers Could Save Lives

Roland Piquepaille writes "Lasers are now commonly used for surgery. With them, you can recover a better sense of vision. Or a tumor inside your body can be eliminated. But these laser light beams, which are currently enclosed inside optical fibers, can harm you if they escape from their enclosures. But now, according to Technology Review, MIT researchers have designed smart optical fibers which can monitor their status while the laser is doing its magic inside you and shut it down if a fiber wall is about to break. So far, the technology is only working in labs, but it could be used for medical applications in a few years."

64 comments

  1. A step forwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Personally I would have hoped they would already have a technology in place to stop lasers destroying vital parts of your body while in surgery.

    1. Re:A step forwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Better hope your plastic surgeon doesn't sneeze.

    2. Re:A step forwards by Jeet81 · · Score: 0

      Nope. Even if they did but there is still the risk of misdiagnosis. During LASIK surgery if they incorrectly diagnose your eye, the laser will burn of extra corneal tissue. Hence you should not wear contacts a week prior to your LASIK consultation. Now if they come up with a way to automatically scan and make appropriate alterations, that would be great.

  2. How often does this happen? by Gothmolly · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I mean, I know several people who've gotten LASIK surgery on their eyes, and its been around for years, yet I've never heard of a laser 'breaking' and damaging anything. Is this a solution looking for a problem?
    I think self-monitoring fiber optics would be GREAT in the datacom industry... in the medical field its surely a 'nice to have'.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    1. Re:How often does this happen? by exaviger · · Score: 1

      I Agree, spent a couple of minutes looking on google for stats on complications during laser surgery etc and didnt really find anything besides lasik surgery.
      Either it is hidden our like you sayed this is a "nice to have" concept.

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      Did i type www.mit-new-headlines.com or www.slashdot.org? (funny that)

    2. Re:How often does this happen? by Hlewagastir · · Score: 5, Informative

      AFAIK lasik doesn't make use of fiber optics, the application for this, as I understand it is the use of fiber optics to guide high intensity laser beams internally to attack tumors directly without the need for highly invasive, potentially dangerous surgeries. The problem with using fiber optics in the past, and the reason why this has not been done, is that fiber optic cables can fail, and "leak" the energy from the laser beam into other nearby organs, potentially causing grave damage. This development allows one to detect when a fiber optic cable is about to fail, and shut down the system before severe damage is done, allowing doctors to make use of a technology which was not previously available to them due to concerns about safety.

    3. Re:How often does this happen? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      LASIK surgery is not without risk. But this technology is for example for removing clots around the heart (angioplasty), currently this is done using quite ordinary optic fibers if they go the laser route. (The most common methode is still a little balloon with a stent) This technology could improve the reliability a bit (but I never heard of anything going wrong, so....). Anyway, even with a breaking optical cable and shooting someone in the wrong place is less damaging then having to cut up someones sternum to do bypass surgery.

    4. Re:How often does this happen? by DrYak · · Score: 3, Informative

      (FYI : I may be a doctor, but surgery isn't my speciality. I have only basic knowledge in that field)

      LASIK is an external intervention. The laser source is delivering the energy almost directly.

      The smart fibers aren't useful for surface operation, but for endocopies.
      Endoscopie are internal surgery, but instead of cuting the patient open, you try to be the least invasive you can, and you only insert thin instruments throught small holes (either natural holes, or small incisions).
      Optical fibers are usually employed to transmit images of the inside of a patient.

      - But, in some type of endoscope, optical fibers can also be used to transmit laser pulse from an external source into the patient, and use the laser to "burn" targets, like tumors.
      (I've never used or actually seen such endoscope. Only heard about them).
      Here's where the smart fibers come into play
      Altough, I've never heard about of such an operation going wrong.
      Normally the system should be able to shut down in case of trouble, but them time it takes between the breaking of an optical fiber, and the time everything shuts down, some laser *may* have time to leak at the breaking site and harm the patient.
      the point of such smart fiber is to detect faulty fiber *before* the actual break. ("This fiber is going to break soon, you should change the endoscope tip now !")
      (Note: I don't know if the same fiber are used for everything (alternating in time) or if different fibers are used to transport visible-domain wavelenghts (lights / picture) and surgical laser)

      There are also "laser-less" endoscopes.

      - Other endoscope tubes may have an additionnal large channel used with some kind of miniature ultralong flexible tweezer to make biopsies (I've seen it in action). They're useful to access/investigate tumors "deep in the patient" like lung tumors (bonches are accessible entering from mouth), stomach ulcers (same path), or large-gut polyps (guess it, not the same entrance).
      They're good, but they're large and the size of the target is limited because of the small size of the "tweezer-like" appendage (works best for biopsies)

      - For surgical intervention in natural body cavities (like abdomen or knee joints) accessible from the skin surface, you use "image-only" optical fiber (the kind you also see in spy-movies where the spy use optical fibers to look through a ventilation or a keyhole), and pass long and thin instruments through 2 other small cuts on the surface.
      (I've seen and assisted an operation on a women's ovaries. I've also seen such operation that were robot-assisted).

      - And there's also a very trivial variant : a simple thin straight 2-3 mm large optical fiber to inspect the nasal cavities through the nostrils. Used by your regular doctor to inspect inside your nose. (I've used it. Great view on the mucosa, on the connection with the ears, on the "bumps" where the sinuses connects, etc...)

      --
      "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  3. Ruining my app chances.. by Sir+Nickel+Deuce · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why do they always seem to post 6 MIT stories a day during the last month of admissions? :|

  4. Incident Rate? by JoeShmoe950 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    With the current "unsmart" lasers, what is the rate of misses right now? have there been any dangerous or even fatal laser misses, and how much safety will this new method actually bring about?

    1. Re:Incident Rate? by sco08y · · Score: 1, Troll

      With the current "unsmart" lasers, what is the rate of misses right now?

      About 1 in 2792.5.

      have there been any dangerous or even fatal laser misses

      No, it's rather more dangerous or fatal when the laser *hits*.

      how much safety will this new method actually bring about?

      According to a January 2003 study by the Centers for Destructive Laser Control, lots.

  5. Wow by gcnaddict · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "can harm you if they escape from their enclosures ... if a fiber wall is about to break"

    That possible? Gee, thanks for making me not want to have LASIK done on my eyes >_ Seriously, I hope this technology comes out of testing and into RWU (Real world use) very soon. If this kind of news leaks out, public paranoia will be all the rage :P

    --
    Viable Slashdot alternatives: https://pipedot.org/ and http://soylentnews.org/
    1. Re:Wow by GuyverDH · · Score: 1

      The user thought they were defining their own new acronym.
      Those funny acronym guys.

      --
      Who is general failure, and why is he reading my hard drive?
  6. Is it worth it? by Aundy · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Aren't already 99% of lazer surgeries succesfull? So will it be worth it to buy and install the new technology to make it 99.9%?

    1. Re:Is it worth it? by managedcode · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If that was not a major problem, then MIT wouldn't have wasted so much resources in finding a solution.

    2. Re:Is it worth it? by Famanoran · · Score: 1

      Depends. Would you want to be within the 0.9% that isn't successful?

    3. Re:Is it worth it? by Fizzl · · Score: 1
      Aren't already 99% of lazer surgeries succesfull? So will it be worth it to buy and install the new technology to make it 99.9%?

      Well, lets say it depends:
      If you are in the .9 marginal, I don't give a shit. If it's me who gets injured, I'll raise a hell to make the equipment safer.
    4. Re:Is it worth it? by rdoger6424 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Exactly. Also, a major problem was the effectiveness aluminum foil hats, which now has everybody is screaming "TINfoil hats!".

      --
      "Hello 911? I just tried to toast some bread, and the toaster grew an arm and stabbed me in the face!"
    5. Re:Is it worth it? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Only the ones that use actual lasers. The low-budget operations that use cheap, knockoff "lazers" have all kinds of problems.

      Besides, 99% successful is a pretty low success rate ... I wouldn't want to go into surgery knowing that I had a 1 in 100 chance of coming out compromised in some way, not unless my condition was life-threatening.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    6. Re:Is it worth it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up. There are millions of Americans that regularly bet in favor of long odds. Why would a surgery be any different? For the people who think they're somehow "due" for the mega-millions jackpot (1 in about 175-million) the odds say you're more "due" for getting killed or maimed on the operating table.

      Always bet on adverse side effects of medication or death on the operating table. Never bet on the lottery or the roulette table.

  7. More information by whitehatlurker · · Score: 5, Informative

    More information appears in a PDF linked off of Fink's bio page. Apparently they use tin in the coating as the conductor. When that melts, the circuit breaks.

    --
    .. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
  8. Safety critical == timing, timing, timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    On a medical robotics project a long while back for remote keyhole surgery we used ADA, partly for it's abiliy to mesh
    with a formal spec and have the program 'proven'. No matter how you cut it (splash) the thing that bothered us most was that even when detecting a critical error there is always a timing factor, a certain number of cycles that would inevitably lie between the error being thrown and the system shutting down to a safe state. ADA is a strongly typed and very error safe language, but it is sluggish. A lot of damage can be done in a short space of time. In the end the solution was to break the prog into essentially two threads, one monitoring the other at all times and never more than 20ms from a total power shutdown. In 20ms you can do real damage with a laser that you cannot do with a mechanical device. I think few people realise just how much thought goes into these systems, and I have great respect for the difficulty of this problem.

  9. A little overstated... by stoneymonster · · Score: 5, Informative

    I work in the medical laser industry (as a software engineer, but I use the actual the devices all the time, and understand our hardware). We use a fiber laser. If the fiber were to break, the device would simply stop working.. because the fiber is clad in a metal armored jacket! I'm certain most delivery devices are similar. Part of the reason for this is you must maintain a minimum bend radius on the fiber, or it is very easy to exceed the total internal reflection constraints on it. The second thing is, our lasers have back reflection fault indicators, which also can go off if anything optically bad happens down the line. Anyone who knows of a medical device that has naked fiber being used to treat can feel free to correct me, but that sounds like a disaster waiting to happen for more reasons than the article states.

    1. Re:A little overstated... by frankmu · · Score: 4, Informative

      i've used the KTP laser for laparoscopic ablation of endometriosis. these come with a flexible fiber you thread through a laparoscopy port. i don't think its a big deal most of the time. everyone in the room has eye protection when this thing is on, and the machine is on standby mode most of the time. i use CO2 mostly now. i am still VERY careful, so i won't burn myself or others. the CO2 laser is coupled to rigid tubing, so breakage isn't a big problem.

      --
      Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
    2. Re:A little overstated... by mpoulton · · Score: 5, Informative

      Anyone who knows of a medical device that has naked fiber being used to treat can feel free to correct me, but that sounds like a disaster waiting to happen for more reasons than the article states.

      Most older general-purpose surgical lasers that I'm aware of use a naked fiber, and I do believe it is a disaster waiting to happen. I don't know about the new lasers coming on the market today, but I have worked with 80's and 90's vintage lasers still in service and they have no protection. For example, the Laserscope 800 is a 20W green (523nm) or 90W IR (1064nm) Q-switched CW YAG laser for general surgery. Its disposable delivery fiber is a 300 micron step-index core with no protection other than the bonded plastic jacket with a diameter of about 1mm. Cheap telecom fiber is better protected than this! The same system is used on the Trimedyne 1000 and the Lasersonics, both of which are 100 watt YAG lasers. I intentionally broke a fiber on my Trimedyne at full power, and was amazed by how dangerous it can be. The fiber can easily be kinked or broken by accident, which instantly results in a white-hot meltdown and separation at the point of damage. The broken end of the fiber then springs back and vaporizes or ignites whatever it flops against, potentially including nearby personnel. It also randomly radiates incomprehensible amounts of extremely dangerous invisible light in God knows what direction, likely frying the retinas of anyone foolish enough not to have excellent leak-proof goggles on. Considering how much they charge for these disposable delivery fibers, one would think some form of metal armor could be included to reduce the chance of damage.

      --
      I am a geek attorney, but not your geek attorney unless you've already retained me. This is not legal advice.
    3. Re:A little overstated... by norton_I · · Score: 3, Informative

      I wouldn't mention this except that you shine 90W lasers into people, but a laser is either CW or Q-switched (though many can operate in both modes). Q-switching is a way of making a laser emit short pulses, (typically a few nanoseconds with peak power in the 10 kW region and up) the opposite of continuous wave. According to Laserscope's website, the 800 series are CW lasers, which can be switched for exposure times down to .1 seconds -- not the same as Q-switching.

    4. Re:A little overstated... by demonlapin · · Score: 2, Informative
      Kinda OT, but during my internship orientation, they showed a remarkable video of what happens when general surgery lasers encounter non-fireproof endotracheal tubes with 100% O2 in them. "Blowtorch" is the word that first came to mind. The whole thing is gone in under 5 seconds.

      We all thought it was a little ridiculous - what idiotic anesthesiologist would use flammable tubing during ENT cases? - but it has apparently happened.

    5. Re:A little overstated... by mpoulton · · Score: 3, Informative

      I wouldn't mention this except that you shine 90W lasers into people, but a laser is either CW or Q-switched (though many can operate in both modes). Q-switching is a way of making a laser emit short pulses, (typically a few nanoseconds with peak power in the 10 kW region and up) the opposite of continuous wave. According to Laserscope's website, the 800 series are CW lasers, which can be switched for exposure times down to .1 seconds -- not the same as Q-switching.

      QCW (quasi-continuous wave) would be a more correct term for the Laserscope. Indeed, in the scientific world, that what we would call it. However, in the medical laser industry, QCW isn't in the lexicon. I suppose it would confuse the doctors to have to learn more about how their lasers work. Instead, it is understood that a CW laser is one in which the active medium is continuously pumped, with or without a free-running Q-switch. This is how thew Laserscope works -- it is, in fact, Q-switched. The arc lamp in a laserscope runs as long as the unit is armed. The Q-switch does, too. At all times, the laser is producing a continuous train of very short pulses at about 20kHz. The exposure control is done with a mechanical shutter in the beam path which dumps the beam when it's not needed. The term CW is applied to lasers of this type to distinguish them from "pulsed" lasers in which the pump source is a flashlamp, even though both produce pulsed beams. For medical purposes, a Q-switched CW laser acts like a continuous beam, whereas a flashlamp pumped laser behaves completely differently. As you point out, in a plain semantic sense any laser with a Q-switch cannot truly be "continuous wave" -- but people call them that anyways instead of saying "continuously pumped". Even the manufacturers do this, as evidenced by Laserscope's website.

      --
      I am a geek attorney, but not your geek attorney unless you've already retained me. This is not legal advice.
    6. Re:A little overstated... by Wilson_6500 · · Score: 1

      back reflection fault indicators

      That's what I was thinking... why not just monitor the fiber's back-reflections like in OTDR eqiupment? Are high-power beamsplitters the problem? Just monitor the returning light, and if the profile for a particular pulse is vastly different from the one before it, well, don't let another pulse through. Drop a little beam dump in front of the output coupler or something--you can't get a faster shutoff than that.

      I personally don't like the idea of a bare fiber being used inside the body... if someone sneezes and gets a "kink" in the line, then I've got a lot of high-energy light just jumping out right next to my vital organs. No thanks.

      From my small amount of high-power laser experience (research model, not medical: one of Continuum's powerlite Nd-YAGs downconverted to 350nm--3J per pulse, maybe? I think I'm off by an order of magnitude), I know I wouldn't want a laser beam anywhere near that amount of energy--definitely not a UV laser--to be uncontrolled anywhere near my person, or any other person for that matter. The direct output of that thing happily ablated our beam dumps, so I don't even want to think what it would've done to flesh.

    7. Re:A little overstated... by PhotoGuy · · Score: 1

      i've used the KTP laser for laparoscopic ablation of endometriosis.

      Well, Duh. Who on Slashdot hasn't?

      --
      Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
  10. I wonder if... by alexwcovington · · Score: 1

    ...anyone ever thought of using an opaque sheath around the fibre optics?

    --
    (It's never too late to join the Renaissance)
    1. Re:I wonder if... by Breakfast+Pants · · Score: 1

      I don't know but I'm sure if they do Roland will have an article on it.

      --

      --

      WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
    2. Re:I wonder if... by DaCapn · · Score: 1

      Well basically by definition the fiber walls ARE opaque. The whole point of fiber optics is that the light is not able to escape the inside of the fiber so long as the conditions for total ineternal reflection are maintained.

    3. Re:I wonder if... by buck_wild · · Score: 1

      I believe what he's trying to say is that an additional sheathing around the fiber itself, a secondary layer, could be a benefit in these types of threatening environments. In other words, if a secondary layer (picture something like a piece of protective opaque plastic surronding the fiber like a conduit) were being used, and the fiber itself broke...nothing bad would happen except the laser itself would not function as expected.

      --
      If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
    4. Re:I wonder if... by DaCapn · · Score: 1

      Yes, of course they are cased, you don't want other light getting in and you don't want to damage the fiber in normal daily usage.

    5. Re:I wonder if... by buck_wild · · Score: 1

      I realize that, but imagine an additional loose sleeve or conduit, especially if it were also reflective. If the first core broke, the second (conduit) would keep the issue from being damaging.

      --
      If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
  11. Isn't tin toxic? by Hlewagastir · · Score: 2

    I'm sure they've considered problems such as this, but it occurs to me that tin isn't exactly good for the human body, is it really wise to run what amounts to a wire sheathed with tin into the body, particularly when the system is designed so that the tin will begin to melt if the system is about to fail, thereby releasing tin into the blood stream? On the other hand, the tin sheathing should help protect the fiber optic cable from mind controlling signals from the government much better than aluminum would.

    1. Re:Isn't tin toxic? by Xarius · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'd like to think the metal would also be enclosed by something else, a layer of heat resistant plastic or something.

      --
      C17H21NO4
  12. Is this really a problem? by Voltageaav · · Score: 2, Informative

    I've done some research into complications of LASIK surgery as my father has had it done and I'm interested in getting it done myself. From what I can tell, problems are farily rare and are almost always correctable. When my father had his surgery done, there was a problem with his left eye. Since, he has been back twice and they paid for both surgeries. He now has perfect eyesight in both eyes. Don't get me wrong, safer is always better. But in all the searching I've found, all of the problems were due to a mistake on the surgeon, not faulty equipment. This is a very informative site I've found. http://www.allaboutvision.com/visionsurgery/lasik_ complication_1.htm

    --
    Someone save me from this sanity.
    1. Re:Is this really a problem? by superflyguy · · Score: 1

      No, it's not a problem with lasik. RTFA. And ROPFC(other people's comments). It's not a laser problem, it's a fiber optic problem, and LASIK doesen't use fiber optics. Other people commented that too. Take time to read people.

    2. Re:Is this really a problem? by CapnGib · · Score: 2, Informative

      Firstly, the fibers and lasers here have nothing to do with LASIK. Since your cornea is on the outside of your body, a fiber is not used.

      Secondly, the these hollow fibers are designed for use in the mid-IR (CO2 laser @10.6m typically) for minimally invasive procedures where the fiber is inserted into the body through a small incision. The fiber is guided through and around obstacles, often times through arteries and into the heart, so the laser can ablate some tissue. Fiber failure is a very real concern in such procedures. Bear in mind, these fibers are not at all similar to the kind used in telecom or shorter wavelength procedures. They have a hollow core and use non-oxide films containing toxic elements (like As, Se, Te, Ge) to confine the laser light. So in addition to ablating the wrong tissue, toxic elements are released into the body should one of these fibers fail in use.

      Thirdly, this particular type of fiber (at least the version without the wires in it) made by MIT/omni-guide has been used in I think 3 human trials. The technology is advancing but is in its infancy. This version of the fiber offers pre-failure detection at the fiber (not cable) level. This is really a huge advantage.

      --
      Beauty is truly in the eye of the tiger
  13. The day draws near... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When world domination can be had by mounting LASERs on sharks -AND- still be PETA friendly! ;)

  14. public health saves lives by frankmu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    just a side comment. we should remember that PUBLIC HEALTH has saved more lives than surgeries and medicines. Vaccinations, smoking cessation, access to clean water, things like that. fiberoptics for communications will save more lives than laser surgery. as a physician, i have to remind my self that alot of what i do is just icing on the cake.

    --
    Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
    1. Re:public health saves lives by vertinox · · Score: 1

      just a side comment. we should remember that PUBLIC HEALTH has saved more lives than surgeries and medicines.

      Health Experts sadly report that when comparing lives saved by Public Health and Surgeries and Medicines that patients still all died anyways in about 80 years.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  15. An idea by speed_of_light · · Score: 1, Funny

    Or a tumor inside your body can be eliminated. Middle Aged Man: Thank heaven! I can finally get that bug out of my mother-in-law's . . . Middle Aged Man's Wife: Herbert!

  16. To Roland P: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks for responding to critics. I didn't think you'd do it, but you've shown me you might actually be human after all.

  17. freaking sharks with.... by gQuigs · · Score: 1

    safer laser beams on their heads!

    1. Re:freaking sharks with.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Followed by the obligatory...

      "I for one welcome our new safer-laser-beamed shark-headed overlords" I suppose?

  18. Nic0le is a PageRank spammer, MOD DOWN by karmatic · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you look at Nic0le's Comment History, you can see he's just another PageRank scammer.

    Mod him below 1, and the links will never show up to Google.

    1. Re:Nic0le is a PageRank spammer, MOD DOWN by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      Won't show up on Google anyways. Slashdot uses rel="nofollow" ;)

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    2. Re:Nic0le is a PageRank spammer, MOD DOWN by michaelhood · · Score: 1

      only on homepages (the bar at the top of the comment), not on in-comment links. dunno why. that was a pretty useless link, anyways. no anchor text? lame.

  19. I doubt it's really unsafe... by Muerte23 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I work with 20 Watt NIR laser, and I've burned myself with it. When you hold your finger in the beam accidentally, it hurts, and you move your finger.

    The thing here is that it is a collimated beam. The kind that doesn't really lose its power density over distance. So I can be burned many meters away. This light must be coupled into a fiber with a high numerical aperture lens - and by the same token the light must be collimated when leaving the fiber.

    Straight out the end of a broken or cut fiber, the light is highly divergent. It would take less than a meter for the 20 W beam to become eye safe (but maybe not eye smart). The only way for a bare fiber to hurt anything is if it brushes right against it, and even then it's a pretty small wound compared to the size of any organ.

    I'm interested to see their justification for all of this.

    -m .this is not a sig

    1. Re:I doubt it's really unsafe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm interested to see their justification for all of this.

      Thread a fiber through an artery and shoot 500W or greater pulsed @10.6m laser light through it. When it breaks the damage due to the stray laser energy is very real, not to mention the vaporized heavy metals you just released in the guys artery, or the large release of potential energy of the strained fiber.

  20. What about a fiber fuse? by Muerte23 · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.rp-photonics.com/fiber_fuse.html

    Basically light is absorbed at a point of damage in the fiber, creating a tiny plasma ball that burns backwards towards the source and destroys the fiber, preventing further output. The size of the plasma ball is very small (on the order of the size of the fiber core).

    Maybe you just stuff some graphite between the bare fiber and the jacket. Then when the fiber core breaks it superheats a tiny bit of the graphite and begins the fiber fuse process - preventing further transmission of laser light.

    And then maybe I just gave away a $1M invention.

    -m

  21. Was it patented? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, I admit, I didn't read the article so I don't how they achieved it. But If I had to do it I would just make a double fiber (fiber going inside a fiber). The laser light would go through the internal fiber while the outer layer would remain dark with sensors monitoring it. If there's light detected in the external fiber- immediate shutdown! Well, did I gess right? Do I get a patent now?