4 ms·
Mind-controlled transgene expression by a wireless-powered designer cell implant
- mike_ivanov 12y agoPrecisely Clockwork Orange.
- sebastianconcpt 12y agoyeah, kind of digital version of it. We are, by the day, achieving a level of technology that our primitive ethics aren't prepared to deal with.
- healthisevil 12y agoThis is good news !
- bsaul 12y agonow imagine if the cell and the controlling brain are in two different bodies :)))
- Circumstances 12y agoCongrats to the team @ ETH!
- vendakka 12y agoMy wife took the time to explain this paper to me (since I rarely read papers related to biology) and it sounds extremely interesting. She was very excited, since tech like this could potentially be used to react to epileptic seizures for example. We can have new control systems added to our bodies which opens up a lot of possibilities.
- thecopy 12y agoCan someone explain?
- vendakka 12y agoI'm just relaying my wife's explanation from a few days ago and so there could be some things lost in translation. However, here goes. They use EEG to detect brain patterns developed during activities such as meditation. This is used to trigger an external electromagnetic field generator. They have mice sitting on the field generator which have implants that can in turn be triggered inductively by the electromagnetic field. This switches on an NIR LED inside the mice. The light illuminates a chamber containing designer cells which are programmed to produce a protein (this is the bit I'm not sure about) when exposed to the NIR light. Figure 5 in the paper was very helpful for me.
- czottmann 12y agoThanks for that explanation. Sounds exciting indeed!
- apl 12y agoUgh, yet another entry in the emerging genre of "We combined well-established techniques in order to generate a vaguely sci-fi-sounding scenario." Other noteworthy examples: 1) Brain-to-brain control: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0111332 http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjourna... 2) Rats controlling each other across large distances: http://www.nature.com/srep/2013/130228/srep01319/full/srep01319.html http://www.nature.com/srep/2013/130228/srep01319/full/srep01... It's junk science, and there's a reason why it's published in Nature Communications, Scientific Reports, or PLoS One. Every individual advancement (brain interfaces, genetic expression control, optogenetics) must be acknowledged as groundbreaking; this stuff, however, shouldn't excite. University PR departments do love it, though. Makes for great press releases.