Paging Dr. MacGyver: Maker Movement Comes To Medical Gear

eggboard writes "The maker movement has started to rapidly turn to medical gear, especially in developing nations. The early results are quite marvelous, but there are a ton of concerns, too. The pace of change is incredibly fast. From the article: '[Many people] without any without any formal medical training—can take advantage of access to global supply chains, cutting-edge medical knowledge, and recent leaps in design and fabrication technology that have made the prototyping process faster, cheaper, and simpler than ever before. Even as concerns about safety and liability are only starting to be addressed, medical inventors and other technical tinkerers are already improving and saving lives—sometimes their own.'"

Comments

From the summary

[codeButcher]

From the article: '[Many people] without any without any formal medical training—can take advantage of access to global supply chains, cutting-edge medical knowledge, and recent leaps in design and fabrication technology that have made the prototyping process faster, cheaper, and simpler than ever before.

And Many people without any formal language training -- can take advantage of access to global electronic publishing media etc.

Hard to see this flourishing in USA

[Anonymous Coward]

The cause is a very noble one but one can see it being only applicable to countries where people are far less litigious and the red tape required to get a product to market is not inversely proportional to your bank balance. It is a sad fact that there are now so many no go zones for inventors there is little wonder that innovation is beginning to stagnate. People can't play with nuclear materials or even the most basic of chemistry sets without arousing the suspicion of the ever more paranoid security apparatus. There needs to be some sort of national exemption for the real tinkers that affords them some protection from litigation and without fear, it is in my opinion can only then real advances be made.

Re:Hard to see this flourishing in USA

[TWX]

"Makers" in my view are predominately a bunch of wannabes; excited and enthusiastic but lacking in real capabilities. They may have an idea for something, but often they have no idea how to go about designing and building it, have to rely on the manufacturing expertise and trades of others, and yet think that they're really accomplishing something.

This is only going to be worse in medical spheres. "People" shouldn't play with nuclear materials, if they're serious about it then once they've received formal training they should form a legal entity in the form of a company, follow basic handling and exposure rules, and conduct thoughtfully designed experiments to determine the outcomes. We learned about playing with nuclear materials in the form of deaths of many, many people that didn't know about the dangers; I expect any random untrained person to be just as bad today.

As for myself, I'm not a "Maker". I have a workshop, I work on things. Sometimes my friends come over and help, sometimes I go over to their workshops to help them. I know that I'm not saving the world when I work on something, and very likely what I'm working on will only benefit me or my household. I'm not deluding myself that somehow my tinkering or puttering around will affect anyone besides myself. Applying a label besides "hobbyist" is stupid. If people want to learn how to build or modify things, then start by tinkering and don't throw stupid labels on it like it actually means something, it doesn't mean squat.

Re:Hard to see this flourishing in USA

[hawkinspeter]

I don't get your hatred of Makers (as long as they don't bust into your workshop and enthusiastically destroy your tools), can't you just avoid them?

Sometimes, people "playing" with new materials/techniques actually make big breakthroughs. I doubt that Pierre and Marie Curie would have discovered so much about radioactivity if they had to go through all of your red tape. Conversely, they may have lived longer, but how are we supposed to learn these things without experience?

If someone is prepared to take the risk of performing home surgery (maybe they can't afford professional care), then I don't see why they should be criminalised for doing so. Yes, some people will make mistakes, but the sooner people learn about the mistakes, the better.

Re:Hard to see this flourishing in USA

[AthanasiusKircher]

First, let me be clear that I do not consider myself associated with the "maker" movement. When I first read about it (mostly in skewed media accounts), I too had a negative impression -- since the media reports I happened upon tended to focus on people who get a lot of attention for ambitious and overly broad goals, but little practical results or expertise. But I don't think that's a fair characterization of the whole idea.

"Makers" in my view are predominately a bunch of wannabes; excited and enthusiastic but lacking in real capabilities. They may have an idea for something, but often they have no idea how to go about designing and building it,

I think you're talking about idealist idiots who don't actually do anything, rather than people who actually participate in making things. Sure, there are plenty of the former in the world, but the main driving force of the "maker" movement (as I understand it) is to transition more people into the latter category.

have to rely on the manufacturing expertise and trades of others, and yet think that they're really accomplishing something.

There's nothing wrong with people collaborating, or even relying on pre-existing manufactured goods which are combined or tweaked in some way. Or would you have everyone all go out and mine their own ore with their bare hands and build a forge so they can act as blacksmiths to make tools that would then allow them to start producing things? We all relying on expertise and labors of others in civilized society. If you can add some value by doing something more with the work of others, what is wrong with that?

This is only going to be worse in medical spheres. "People" shouldn't play with nuclear materials

Okay, I know the GP mentioned nuclear materials, but I don't think that's at all a fair comparison for the kinds of medical devices primarily mentioned in TFA. Go read it. The examples they give are things like modified construction helmets with added electronics that work as a kind of "hearing aid" for people with particular auditory problems. Otherwise, these people would have to buy ridiculously expensive devices or have surgery. Also from TFA -- some prosthetics... which are just as effective (or more so) compared to expensive standard "medical" ones. Some of the things mentioned in TFA have even been approved by government organizations because they proved to be better than or useful in different ways from existing technology.

I absolutely agree with you that there are many medical devices which should NOT be a DIY job. If you need a tool during surgery, or you need diagnostic equipment that gives reliable results, people's lives will be on the line when something fails. But a specialized DIY hearing aid?? What's the worst that's going to happen if it malfunctions? The person just takes the thing off. It's probably no worse than some sort of "approved" device having its battery go dead or something.

TFA for the most part outlines a lot of situations for medical devices that won't be likely to kill or even significantly harm someone if they malfunction. Instead, the choice for these people often is -- live without hearing or a hand or whatever because they can't afford the "approved" device, or get the DIY one for a tiny fraction of the cost.

You really think this is that bad? We're not talking about people playing around with nuclear materials in their basement.

I'm not deluding myself that somehow my tinkering or puttering around will affect anyone besides myself. Applying a label besides "hobbyist" is stupid.

Yeah, see I think you're missing a critical distinction. I associate the term "hobbyist" with exactly the kind of thing you describe: someone who works on stuff that doesn't really provide a significant benefit to anyone, other than perhaps entertainment or a sense of "accomplishment" for the individual doin

Re:fuck everything

[mwvdlee]

I'm not sure medical rapid prototyping is advanced enough to offer the replacement parts you need.

"Concerns"

[Azghoul]

You can always tell the entrenched interests are getting worried about their bottom line when "concerns" start appearing.

"How DARE they build a prosthetic with a cheap 3D printer!?" "But it might be DANGEROUS!"

No, you are just scared that your ridiculous profit margins might get a haircut, and use regulation and FUD to increase the barrier to entry into "your" market. This is a great story and should be lauded by all, not tainted by the fishy smell of the concern trolls.

Re:"Concerns"

[Ihlosi]

"How DARE they build a prosthetic with a cheap 3D printer!?" "But it might be DANGEROUS!"

I'm sure if those "entrenched interests" weren't familiar with multi-million dollar lawsuits, they'd use cheap 3D printers to build prosthetics, too.

Oh, and might I interest you in a used Therac-25?

Re:"Concerns"

[Anonymous Coward]

Your ignorance is scary.

You damn well should be concerned about random medical devices made in someone's garage. You're ridiculously stupid if you aren't.

If you're living in Rwanda, your concern may be outweighed by the NEED for medical equipment of some form. If you're in America, you can drive to proper medical equipment faster than you can print it.

There is a REASON that medical device approval takes time. There is absolutely no way you can test for 'long term' effects without taking 'long term' into it. Just because you test a million switches for a million button presses and they all pass because you did it in the course of a week and none of them had any time to corrode doesn't mean they'll last for 1 billion years since they only get pressed a couple times a day.

Worse still ... Joe, over in his garage, doesn't likely have any of the knowledge about WHY some of the things he is doing is dangerous, or won't work. Like he's unaware of the fact that putting a small bump in the middle of where the prosthetic attaches to the body significantly lowers discomfort (totally made up statement), and again, thats find for the poor guy stuck in Rwanda who is going to die if he can't walk reasonably well and has no way to seek proper medical treatment.

But he should still be concerned about what it might change.

I for one, with a wife who is a lab animal vet ... know damn well how many CRAZY side effect can happen in research where people know ALL ABOUT the subject.

You're an idiot of the Prosthetic arm from Joes RepRap in his garage doesn't concern you. That doesn't mean its 'bad', but you're an idiot for not being concerned about the possible unforeseen effects.

These effects in other engineering practices are less important, when someones life is on the line, its another story entirely. If I print a part for my RC car and it brakes during a race, I just print another one and race again tomorrow. If I print a leg and it breaks while someone is walking, its very likely they'll break another bone when they fall due to lack of support from the broken plastic leg.

I have a 3D Printer, a desktop CNC machine, and make devices and gadgets all the time with my equipment, am an advocate of the idea of the maker movement ...

No one in the maker movement should be doing medical stuff, unless they happened to already be engineers or in medicine. Anyone in the maker movement who is qualified and thinks they have sufficient skills is MORE than qualified to get a job somewhere that makes their work safe. That means pretty much anyone who has the money to buy a 3d printer

And lets be clear, there is no 'cheap 3d printed prosthetic'. The materials of required strength that can be 3d printed are not cheap in the first place. The printer types required to use said resin are not yet cheap (though there is a $10 prototype/hack that is mind numbingly impressive, its resin is ridiculously expensive).

3D printing is for prototyping. There is nothing you can't make better, cheaper in other ways if its going to be more than a one off production.

Re:"Concerns"

[jpschaaf]

You damn well should be concerned about random medical devices made in someone's garage.

It's really not that simple. Almost anyone on slashdot is unbelievably wealthy by comparison to the the average denizen of our world. Risks that are unacceptable for a wealthy person are very acceptable for someone who has nothing. Think about it: if your choice is between certain death due to heart failure or using a pacemaker assembled by a tinkerer in his/her garage, a rational person would be willing to accept additional and substantial risks. Admittedly, I don't want a pressure cooker in somebody's kitchen to sterilize medical devices that I will be using, but I can certainly understand why someone else would.

Re:"Concerns"

[AthanasiusKircher]

You damn well should be concerned about random medical devices made in someone's garage. You're ridiculously stupid if you aren't.

Or you can read TFA, and see some examples of devices which likely won't kill someone or even significantly harm them if they malfunction, yet they help people in need, who otherwise could not afford standard medical devices.

Take, for example the woman from TFA who needed a special type of hearing aid for an unusual condition:

The surgery costs from thousands to tens of thousands of dollars, and is not always covered by insurance. Insurers rarely, if ever, cover the snap-on hearing aid, which is fragile, has a price tag that can range from $4,000 to $7,000, and requires replacement every several years.

âoeI realized it sounded like something I could build in my living room,â Marzec says, and thatâ(TM)s exactly what she did, attaching electronics from Radio Shack to a standard construction hardhat.

Is it really going to be armageddon if someone builds a hearing aid? Even if it malfunctions, what is the likely downside? The person takes off the helmet. How is this any worse than an "approved" medical hearing aid with a failing battery or something?

And contrast that against the upside: without the DIY hack, the person would either have potentially shell out tens of thousands of dollars which is not reimbursed by insurance. Or, they could just not hear. Is this really such a terrible third choice -- to pay a few hundreds dollars and be able to hear again, with little downside?

I absolutely agree with you that there are a lot of medical devices that should NOT be made by random DIYers. You need a reliable tool for surgery or a piece of diagnostic equipment to look for life-threatening conditions... obviously, you need it to work or people could die or be severely injured. But there are also plenty of things that could be hugely beneficial, and they are unlikely to have terrible consequences even if they fail. Yet they could mean the difference for some people between hearing or not hearing.

TFA has a number of examples that fall into this category -- "medical devices" that provide significant benefit but would be unlikely to cause dangerous results if they failed. What's wrong with investigating such things for potential DIY applications?

developed vs undeveloped

[tommyatomic]

Something to think about. Import/export controls, Taxes and Tarrifs.

These exist for almost everything except software/information (non cryptological) and raw materials.

Alot of the obsurd costs of bringing various products into another country are contrived but the useless bureaucracies in the sending or receiving countries.

There are no such costs involved in 3d printing something onsite. In the 3rd world this is huge. When employed people might only make $10 a week, a 45% markup plus packaging and shipping costs means there are a great number of things we take for granted in 1st world nations that people in the 3rd world have only seen photos of.

Re:Fire up the Makerbot

[jellomizer]

Perhaps not for bones, but you can make custom sized casts, that are lighter than plaster. Custom sized tools for surgery. Heck just be able to have a supply of medical equipment in storage so you don't need a huge inventory, allowing smaller surgical areas.

A lot of assumptions

[nobuddy]

there are TONS of people taking the extreme stance here. No one can envision a 3d printed cast, or homemade oxygen concentrators. the bulk of the outrage is along the lines of "How DARE they 3D print a new heart in their garage!!11!!"

There is a happy medium of non life-threatening tools and devices that can save people a lot of money. I seriously doubt these people are making implanted pacemakers or bluetooth retina replacements here.