Slashdot Mirror


IBM Researchers Working Toward Cheap, Fast DNA Reader

nk497 writes "IBM scientists are working on ambitious research where nano-sized holes will be drilled into computer chips and DNA passed through to create a 'genetic code reader.' A DNA molecule would be passed through a hole just three nanometers wide, while an electrical sensor 'reads' the DNA. The challenge of the silicon-based 'DNA Transistor' would be to slow and control the motion of the DNA through the hole so the reader could decode what is inside it. IBM claimed that if the project was successful it could make personalised genome analysis as cheap as $100 to $1,000, and compared it to the first-ever sequencing done for the Human Genome Project, which cost $3 billion."

10 of 90 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Cynicism by Lloyd_Bryant · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why is it that multibillion dollar companies are constantly researching exciting new tech that makes it more and more impossible for us to remain annonymous? Just once, I want to see IBM or somebody backing Tor or Freenet or something similar.

    Please remember that IBM is, like most corporations, a for-profit entity. Which means that the vast majority of their research is going to be aimed at projects that will allow them to make a buck.

    In short - Tor and Freenet don't spend gazillions of dollars on technologies, while governments do.

    --
    Don't tell me to get a life. I had one once. It sucked.
  2. Re:Amazing! by toppavak · · Score: 5, Informative

    Oh its been done. In fact, ordering custom DNA sequences is pretty cheap.

  3. I Smell Synergy! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    High speed, computer-assisted, genetic analysis technology should go beautifully with IBM's existing expertise in Data-driven eugenics solutions...

  4. Another technology is ahead so far by Michael+G.+Kaplan · · Score: 5, Informative

    The New York Times published an article in August about a technology that decoded a human genome for less than $50,000. The inventor speculates that the technology will be able to decode a genome for just $1,000 in 2-3 years.

    That being said it will be amazing to see the IBM project succeed. Either way the cost of decoding a genome is dropping so quickly it puts Moore's Law to shame.

  5. Re:The implications are huge by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Funny

    dd if=~/OMG_hax/smallpox.img of=/dev/dna0

  6. Re:Other uses by Taibhsear · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You prove it by the piece of paper that tells you your health benefits was denied because of a pre-existing condition. Your records will show if you've had treatment for it or not. It's not a conspiracy/finger pointing kind of thing. Proof is easily come by.

  7. Re:Other uses by Shakrai · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Well, since you are being a complete nay-sayer to further your own agenda, allow me to respond with some other potential uses of this technology:

    Law enforcement will use it to help solve crime.

    The innocence project will use it to get wrongfully convicted people out of prison/off death row.

    Businesses and private individuals will be able to use it to enhance the security of their homes/offices/factories/etc.

    Adopted children will be able to use it to figure out who their biological parents are.

    The child support system will be able to use it to weed out those who aren't parents and confirm those who are.

    The point I'm trying to make is that technology isn't inherently good or evil. It's what we do with it that matters. I find it disturbing that you couldn't name a single positive use for this technology.

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  8. Re:Cynicism by Laxitive · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you think that fast and cheap DNA reading applies only (or even mostly) to monitoring of individuals, you do not have a real grasp of the scope and applicability of DNA sequencing.

    There are enormous resources in scientific research that goes toward generating datasets. Sequencing of humans is a significant part of it, but most of that applies to medicinal uses, such as cancer genotyping (which uses sequencing to identify specifically the genotypic characteristics of a particular tumor colony so it can be treated much more effectively than just trying to guess by looking at it "from the outside"). Also, a huge new area in medicine is going to be "personalized" medicine. Medicine that's actually tailored to the specific genetic traits that YOU have, so that the chances of side-effects are reduced and effectiveness is increased.

    Then there are the thousands of researchers that need to collect sequence datasets on organisms that have NOTHING to do with humans. A big chunk of this is plant genetics: crop stress tolerance (e.g. make wheat grow more reliably in colder or dryer climates, or resist disease better), natural product optimization (e.g. make canola plants produce 10% more of the kinds of oils you care about, and less of the crap you don't). Another big chunk of this research is basic science: figuring out the specific details of how evolution has progressed, or to identify the core biological processes that make organisms tick. That's core evolutionary biology and biomechanics research.

    Then there's the people trying to do constructive genomics: actually build organisms that do specific things. Like modifying yeast to produce some complex bioproduct that requires a network of potentially hundreds of genes. Or creating organisms that filter waste from water. Or building algae variants that run on sunlight and produce oil.

    All of these things could desperately use robust, cheap, accessible sequencing platforms. Genetic sequencing is not all about your privacy. It's a platform which has the scope to save scientists and researchers millions, and put that towards more research and better results than towards trying to scrape out a few bases from a tissue sample.

    IBM is trying big time to get into the life sciences (that's wrong actually, they actually already HAVE products they market to the life sciences, like systems for large-scale data processing). It is worth billions to them, and they want to tap it.

    -Laxitive

  9. Re:Summary is wrong by trb · · Score: 3, Insightful
    the first-ever sequencing done for the Human Genome Project, which cost $3 billion.

    And it cost $15 billion for the first person to drive into Boston after the Big Dig. That's creative accounting.

  10. Re:Cynicism by interkin3tic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I completely agree that the technology can be used for awesome and amazing things. I just have a feeling that most of the things it's going to be used for are things that aren't going to benefit humanity in such lofty ways.

    That second part is true of every single technology ever invented. The first sharpened stick man ever made may have been used to kill food, but the second one was probably used to kill another dude and steal his woman.

    Tor isn't a holy technology that can only be used in good ways either. I'm guessing 5 seconds after it was finished, someone said something like "Think of the children! This will be used to transmit child porn." You probably scoff at that objection and, and rightfully so, but that's exactly our reaction to your objection to the DNA reader.