Jump to content

Grow-your-own organs could be here within five years, as scientists prove they work in pigs


Gordo

Recommended Posts

I think this type of technology advancement may be key to serious longevity gains in the future.  Good to see progress in this field:

Grow-your-own organs could be here within five years, as scientists prove they work in pigs 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2018/08/01/grow-your-own-organs-could-within-five-years-scientists-prove/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a lot less to this story than the headline implies. First of all, they had to take an organ (lung) from another pig and subject it to the growing process, before putting the lung into the recipient pig. So you still need a "donor" pig. That's a very big deal. Now, they do a lot of handwaving with claims that down the line they'll be able to use "stem cells" and "3-D design" and that way avoid the need for a donor, but it's... still handwaving. Tell you what, I have a match in my pocket, and I can dig a booger out of my nose, and make a full human being out of those two - all I need to do: HANDWAVING COMMENCES - "some bioengineering", and in 5-10 years blah, blah, blah.

Wake me up when you've actually, you know, done what you claim you've done, without handwaving, and then we'll talk. Get the stem cells and demonstrate to me the process from the beginning to the end, and then the headline will be justified. Demonstrate, like in do it - not just talk about it. Until then, it's just HYPE.

I can't tell you how many articles I've read in my life, where someone did some marginal experiment, and based on that generated a huge headline promising a cure for cancer and a fully automated gay space communist nirvana, and only in small print there's some handwaving. Invariably, the promises don't come to pass.

Hype and more hype. Same as it ever was. It used to be called "it sells newspapers", today it's called "clickbait", but the bottom line is the same - throw whatever gets the rubes to pay, either in hard cash or eyeballs/clicks/time.

In other news: while we are discussing jet packs and flying cars "any moment now", I still can't find a kettle to boil water that'll last more than a couple of years without rusting, screws loosening and generally turning to cr@p, no matter what the reviews on Amazon say, and no matter the country of manufacture (Germany, Japan etc.), and no matter the price ($, $$, $$$). The same can be said for any number of household items that nobody seems to have the technology to make with a quality worth a damn, as they're all too busy promising pie in the sky.

Btw., it's all very nice that you'll be able to grow your own organs "in 5 to 10 years" (same timeline as the arrival of fusion energy generation, that's been 5-10 years away for 80 years now). Bravo, medical science. Now, if only they'd be able to cure the common cold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Tom!

I don't agree with you.  I'm a research mathematician.  Without forming hypotheses, you can't start trying to prove something -- since you have no ideas to try to bring to fruition.

With the philosophy that you propose, there would have been no Industrial Revolution.  Going back further, we would have never had the wheel (Tom says "hype"; drag the stones and stop wasting time).

Not to say what we would say about the efforts of Reimann or Einstein -- "Stop wasting time on abstractions that will never work".

My apologies in advance for being so harsh on you.

But your comment merits it.

Without conception, invention can never occur.

?

  --  Saul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Saul for those observations. Furthermore, I don't take issue with anything you have said. Which leads me to believe you have misunderstood my remarks. I'm not opposed to generating hypothesis, theories, setting ambitious goals or "shooting for the moon" - what I am opposed to is making meritless claims that are not truthful. "We'd like to generate human organs, here's how we propose to do it" - no problem. "Grow-your-own organs could be here within five years, as scientists prove they work in pigs" - problem.

My problem - no, scientists have NOT proven that this process works in pigs. The implication of the headline is that the scientists generated new organs of the subject pig - whereas they did no such thing. They have merely grown tissue based on a donor pig's organs. Had the headline reflected their true accomplishment, I'd have no issue. But that is not what happened. It was exaggerated in the headline... which is called "hype". If you make a claim, back it up. All I ask is for a little "truth in advertising" - if that makes me a luddite, I'll happily wear that label. However, I don't believe I'm a luddite at all. I'm willing to take wild speculative risks - otherwise I'd never have gotten involved in the whole CR approach. But I also like to be accurate.

Having been a witness to countless hyped expectations, I grow very sceptical when I see that the researchers are exaggerating their accomplishments - exaggeration and hype has always been a hallmark of failure and grifting (see: David Sinclair's multiple failures moving from hype to actual delivery). Seeing all the telltale signs of dishonest hype in this case here, my bet is that it no human organs will be generated from the human subject's own tissue in the timeframe indicated (5-10 years) - I believe we'll both be around for the next 5-10 years, we'll see who is right.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, TomBAvoider said:

 

In other news: while we are discussing jet packs and flying cars "any moment now", I still can't find a kettle to boil water that'll last more than a couple of years without rusting, screws loosening and generally turning to cr@p, no matter what the reviews on Amazon say, and no matter the country of manufacture (Germany, Japan etc.), and no matter the price ($, $$, $$$). The same can be said for any number of household items that nobody seems to have the technology to make with a quality worth a damn, as they're all too busy promising pie in the sky.

A couple of years? You are a lucky man, LOL, to me they are more likely to last a couple of months!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/3/2018 at 10:43 AM, mccoy said:

A couple of years? You are a lucky man, LOL, to me they are more likely to last a couple of months!!

My wife gets kitchen stuff and small appliances, tea kettle, blender, mixer, grinder, pasta maker, juicer, waffle iron, etc. at garage sales that are many decades old and typically look close to new except for maybe a  chip in the thick porcelain or a small dent in the stainless steel from a hard drop or other substantial abuse.  And they are usually super cheap, $1 to $5.  They tend to be big and heavy which can make storage and use less convenient if they can't be left out on a table or counter top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...