COULD SOMEONE SMARTER THAN ME IN SCIENCE EXPLAIN THIS TO ME!!!????

[Lazlo]

Okay, so like I'm not stupid.

But there may be some of you much, much smarter than me when it comes to computer science, engineering that type of thing.

I want to know from those of you who are familiar with nanotechnology, exponential growth etc. etc.
to explain why if what Kurzweil says is true here then do we not see far greater advancement in medical science? Is this because computer modelling and that type of thing hasn't fully integrated into the medical community?

I think medicine right now is very very rudimentary and hasn't improved much since the nineteenth century. Of course, this may not be true, there are SOME advancements. But do you think the type of truly rapid progress, that Kurzweil is speaking about here in this video. I mean if he's predicting AI by 2030 then for f**k's sake --even if we don't have full AI we'll have f**king amazing computers by then. So how can we expect medicine to benefit or be influenced by this type of progress?

Please, only people with advanced undergraduate or graduate degress in HARD SCIENCE and TECH respond. I don't wanna hear from any jack-offs. I'm just interested in when something like CT-Xioloc bone implants can be made your own bone (from some small sample or whatever).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1339&v=oPyCHwPS04E

[Lefortitude]

My methodology in understanding these things is to follow the money. Biopharma, Biotech and healthcare in general are interesting as they behave differently economically than any other sector (youre not going to shop around for the best deal while youre having a heart attack; people spend outside their budgets etc.)

Alot of the cash flow for these business come as annuities, steady consistent payments over time. The intention of biopharma particularly is not to cure disease, but to manage symptoms.

There have been very recent cases of diseases being cured and the result being negative financially for the company (see HCV and Gilead Sciences). 

Follow the money. 

[kavan]

Well, I qualify in terms of a degree (undergrad) you want to hear from. Not only that but I also used to know Marvin Minsky, (Kurzweil refers to him) his daughter Margaret and was surrounded by the AI type geniuses at MIT.

However, I disclose that my salient observation, at the time, about the AI 'types' was that these people were NOT the types interested in health and longevity and especially NOT appearance and most certainly were not well rounded (well except for being a ROUND SHAPE) when in came to humanities, art, aesthetics etc.

The people who were going to live longer and look better were the jocks at HARVARD studying the humanities and eating the right foods. In terms of LOOKS (which you are focused on), MIT was basically a HAVEN for the HOMELY. It was a place where one could just be SMART and not have to worry about not being good looking. None of those types had any interest in their LOOKS or anything else 'aesthetic' for that matter.

I'm not sure, correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be depending on those types to come up with some breakthrough that is going to make people incredibly handsome or beautiful. IDK, it's just hard for me to fathom how the types LEAST interested in AESTHETICS are going to devote themselves to making people look more beautiful.

Don't get me wrong. I'm sure there will be advancements where implants can be generated from your own bone if that's what you are waiting for. Just don't expect all the highly developed LEFT BRAINED tech whizzes to come up with the RIGHT SHAPE for them.

[Lazlo]

THanks Kavan that is fine.

What I want to know however (from someone involved in science) WHEN DO THEY THINK THE NECESSARY INNOVATIONS WILL HAPPEN TO SYNTHESIZE BONE AND TISSUE (SKIN FAT) from you own cells might occur.

Once we have that tech we are FINE. You'll be able to change your face to almost anything. That's all we need. Bio-identical bone and to top it off skin regeneration. I feel like these techs should be out really really soon, no?

[PloskoPlus]

The AI singularity is rapture for nerds.

[kavan]

THanks Kavan that is fine.

What I want to know however (from someone involved in science) WHEN DO THEY THINK THE NECESSARY INNOVATIONS WILL HAPPEN TO SYNTHESIZE BONE AND TISSUE (SKIN FAT) from you own cells might occur.

Once we have that tech we are FINE. You'll be able to change your face to almost anything. That's all we need. Bio-identical bone and to top it off skin regeneration. I feel like these techs should be out really really soon, no?

They are already on there way to repairing skin and bone tissue with stem cells found in fat.

http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/regenerating-body-parts-how-we-can-transform-fat-cells-stem-cells-repair-spinal/

https://www.cnn.com/2017/05/22/health/fat-stem-cells-fix-wrist-injury-cartilage/index.html

As far as faces go, some of the docs doing fat grafting, (one mover and shaker being sydney coleman) contend that the f/gs to the bone level CAN regenerate into bone.

[Bobbit]

Okay, so like I'm not stupid.

But there may be some of you much, much smarter than me when it comes to computer science, engineering that type of thing.

I want to know from those of you who are familiar with nanotechnology, exponential growth etc. etc.
to explain why if what Kurzweil says is true here then do we not see far greater advancement in medical science? Is this because computer modelling and that type of thing hasn't fully integrated into the medical community?

I think medicine right now is very very rudimentary and hasn't improved much since the nineteenth century. Of course, this may not be true, there are SOME advancements. But do you think the type of truly rapid progress, that Kurzweil is speaking about here in this video. I mean if he's predicting AI by 2030 then for f**k's sake --even if we don't have full AI we'll have f**king amazing computers by then. So how can we expect medicine to benefit or be influenced by this type of progress?

Please, only people with advanced undergraduate or graduate degress in HARD SCIENCE and TECH respond. I don't wanna hear from any jack-offs. I'm just interested in when something like CT-Xioloc bone implants can be made your own bone (from some small sample or whatever).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1339&v=oPyCHwPS04E

Lazlo,

I think the fundamental problem is that Moore's Law only applies to the number of semiconductor circuits one can get onto a piece of substrate.

There has never been any "paradigm" even remotely similar to Moore's Law applicable to any other branch of human endeavor so far as I know.

 

[Lazlo]

The AI singularity is rapture for nerds.

I'm not asking for the full blown singularity. I'm just asking about rate of progress in terms of biological regeneration.

As soon as we can custom design implants out of real bone (grown from a patient biopsy or whatever) then we can literally re-design a human face into whatever we want.

And I personally can't imagine given recent advances, not only in computer modelling of bioligical tissue etc. this could be that far away.

Listen we have Crisp-r, we have companies like epibone and polarity, and many others. Coupled with powerful computing and 3-D bioprinting we've got to have at least rudimentary products like bone and skin available.

I'm not even asking about full blown organs which everyone agrees is not that long away.

What I'm saying is that the current paradigm of surgery and plastic surgery is based on models that have gone almost unaltered since the bloody 19th century and even earlier back to the renaissance. We're ready for a real sea-change. I'm not asking for the singularity.

Also, Plosko, I asked only people with advanced science degrees respond here which I'm not sure includes your pointless imput.

[Lazlo]

Lazlo,

I think the fundamental problem is that Moore's Law only applies to the number of semiconductor circuits one can get onto a piece of substrate.

There has never been any "paradigm" even remotely similar to Moore's Law applicable to any other branch of human endeavor so far as I know.

So I'm aware of that objection. Recently Kurzweil has argued even software has been expanding as fast as Moore's law so we're having a kind of integration effect.

Regardless, I understand that objection. But the truth is we ARE developing companies and experiments that are attempting to go beyond the current surgery paradign through biological regeneration.

As I said in the original post. Anyone here (and there must be many) in medicine, or scientific research have any news or projections for us on this front?

[kavan]

I'm not asking for the full blown singularity. I'm just asking about rate of progress in terms of biological regeneration.

As soon as we can custom design implants out of real bone (grown from a patient biopsy or whatever) then we can literally re-design a human face into whatever we want.

And I personally can't imagine given recent advances, not only in computer modelling of bioligical tissue etc. this could be that far away.

Listen we have Crisp-r, we have companies like epibone and polarity, and many others. Coupled with powerful computing and 3-D bioprinting we've got to have at least rudimentary products like bone and skin available.

I'm not even asking about full blown organs which everyone agrees is not that long away.

What I'm saying is that the current paradigm of surgery and plastic surgery is based on models that have gone almost unaltered since the bloody 19th century and even earlier back to the renaissance. We're ready for a real sea-change. I'm not asking for the singularity.

Also, Plosko, I asked only people with advanced science degrees respond here which I'm not sure includes your pointless imput.

No. Being able to make face implants with (your own) bone does not necessarily imply the DESIGN will conform to 'anything you want'. No more than the design of CUSTOM implants with NON BONE (but bio-compatible materials) will turn a potato face into Gandi. Although your own bone is certainly preferable to artificial materials, you attribute too much  MAGIC to the material. The limiting factor is the same as it is today with custom implants which is not only the DESIGN of them (the technology to produce them does not guarantee that the design of them will kick up exactly what you have in your mind's eye to see in the mirror) but also the LIMITATIONS of your OWN bone and soft tissue they are placed over to accommodate them. So, as far as 'your own bone' goes, in particular your own face bones as they are as is, someone's own face bone structure could present LIMITATIONS in getting what you want, just like it does presently with all the high tech custom face implants.

Although I agree that face implants with one's own bone is preferable to artificial materials, especially those averse to artificial materials, it's not something where the material of your own bone is going to 'mean' unlimited design capacity to transform someone in the precise way they wish to be transformed.

[Lazlo]

No. Being able to make face implants with (your own) bone does not necessarily imply the DESIGN will conform to 'anything you want'. No more than the design of CUSTOM implants with NON BONE (but bio-compatible materials) will turn a potato face into Gandi. Although your own bone is certainly preferable to artificial materials, you attribute too much  MAGIC to the material. The limiting factor is the same as it is today with custom implants which is not only the DESIGN of them (the technology to produce them does not guarantee that the design of them will kick up exactly what you have in your mind's eye to see in the mirror) but also the LIMITATIONS of your OWN bone and soft tissue they are placed over to accommodate them. So, as far as 'your own bone' goes, in particular your own face bones as they are as is, someone's own face bone structure could present LIMITATIONS in getting what you want, just like it does presently with all the high tech custom face implants.

Although I agree that face implants with one's own bone is preferable to artificial materials, especially those averse to artificial materials, it's not something where the material of your own bone is going to 'mean' unlimited design capacity to transform someone in the precise way they wish to be transformed.

Fine, agreed I was too optimistic there. But its all I need. If I personally could get custom implants out of something that would become my own bone I know I only need a few tweaks here and there which would take me to the heights of aesthetic ascension.

So when will biological bone implants be available? Science geeks help me! Tim Chalamet, come and get at meh!

[ditterbo]

What's the difference really between a custom silicone implant vs a futuristic boney one?  Once a boney augmentation becomes available, would the scar capsule left from the old custom silicone implant likely cause irregularities?  My few minutes of googling suggests the periosteum doesn't serve much purpose for adults, so it seems OK for there to be no contact between the periosteum and bone.  Plosko quoted a doc saying muscles like being attached to bone. So unless muscles get nutrients from the bone, maybe facial muscles won't animate your face quite as much as they would if they were against bone? Like I know with cheek implants, a lot of people struggle to smile "ear-to-ear", as in with the corner edges where their lips meet, due to the implants.   I could sure see that being distressful to the patient. 

I'm discounting custom medpor implants because of the difficulty that comes in removing them (especially if like bone augmentation materializes) and the collateral damage risk with medpor removal.

[Lazlo]

What's the difference really between a custom silicone implant vs a futuristic boney one?  Once a boney augmentation becomes available, would the scar capsule left from the old custom silicone implant likely cause irregularities?  My few minutes of googling suggests the periosteum doesn't serve much purpose for adults, so it seems OK for there to be no contact between the periosteum and bone.  Plosko quoted a doc saying muscles like being attached to bone. So unless muscles get nutrients from the bone, maybe facial muscles won't animate your face quite as much as they would if they were against bone? Like I know with cheek implants, a lot of people struggle to smile "ear-to-ear", as in with the corner edges where their lips meet, due to the implants.   I could sure see that being distressful to the patient. 

I'm discounting custom medpor implants because of the difficulty that comes in removing them (especially if like bone augmentation materializes) and the collateral damage risk with medpor removal.

so look at the original question and the subject and then look at your response.

[ditterbo]

Lol, ouch. I'll show myself out. GL

[Lazlo]

Lol, ouch. I'll show myself out. GL

Lol I was just joshing --I get what you're saying but I jus want to know when biological implants will be a thing. Too many cases of infection I personally know and bone erosion so I don't want to ever risk it.