14 replies to this topic

[Reno]

I ran across this article from the life extension magazine on the future of nanomedicine. In the article Robert Freitas describes and talks about the following subjects in pretty good detail. The article doesn't really say anything new that hasn't been posted here, but it is pretty informative and worth the read. It's worth noting that in the article they're predicting functional medical nanites by the 2020s

What is a Medical Nanorobot?
Future Tools For Fighting Infection
Replacing Worn-Out or Damaged Cells
Building an Exciting Future


Click here -----> Read this Article

Edited by bobscrachy, 16 January 2009 - 08:32 PM.

[DebraJackson]

.
What is a Medical Nanorobot?

"Nanorobots may be the ultimate medical devices, Frost report posits" (Magdalena Morris)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nanotubes

[Luna]

2020s.. really?
whole body chromosome replacement therapy by then?
eliminate most diseases?-

[Boondock]

Personally, I'd be very surprised if these technologies (in the way the article talks about them) come online in the 2020s.

[Reno]

2020s.. really?
whole body chromosome replacement therapy by then?
eliminate most diseases?-

I remember in the 90s many in nanotechnology were predicting the first prototype nanite by the end of this decade. There are already nanoengineered drugs in clinical trial that have been rolled out to specifically target disease. That may not be nanorobotics, but it is reality at the end of THIS decade. Given another 10-20 years and there is no doubt in my mind that you'll see the end to most disease. It really is hard to imagine, but if you think about it, it's not too far fetched.

Edited by bobscrachy, 16 June 2009 - 12:30 AM.

[chuckb]

The great worry I have about that is : how or why would you end all disease in a capitalist system?

The health industry is worth so much $$$$ - wouldn't the price of nano treatment be up through the roof?

I see a future where you can indeed get treated by nanobots - but only for each health complaint you have, and each one costing you thousands.
I'm quite cynical when it comes to human nature - that's why I want to see a future where there's no greed and alot more getting along.
With the world as it is, I can't imagine a nanobot pricetag that represents the actual costs of manufacturing technology and implementation only.

What would happen also in a country with socialized medicine? Would Yankees visit Canada in droves and get free treatment in the hospital system using false credentials? How about black-market back-alley nanobot treatment?

[advancedatheist]

The great worry I have about that is : how or why would you end all disease in a capitalist system?

As Michael Jackson showed, physicians will readily act against their better judgment about the patent's welfare when you offer them enough money. Frankly I think all of Jackson's physicians and surgeons who enabled this freak should lose their licenses.

[Mind]

The health industry is worth so much $$$$ - wouldn't the price of nano treatment be up through the roof?

Nanotech is primarily an information-based technology. When you build a freeway, it costs tens of millions of dollars per mile because of huge material and labor costs. It is extremely energy intensive. Nanotech is just the opposite. Nanomedicine requires less labor, less energy, and will likely be much more effective, thus it will likely be cheaper and more widespread than current expensive medical treatments. We have nanotech in our computers, cell phones, cameras, clothing, etc... and the price of each keeps coming down year after year.

[advancedatheist]

We students of the paleo-future have heard claims like Freitas's before. For example:

Medical Predictions for 1999 (1955), by a physician in Arkansas named Dr. Lowry H. McDaniel.

McDaniel back in 1955 predicted that in that far-future year 1999, people would have a "150-year span of life." Which I guess means that at least one individual aged 106 in the year 1955, despite his or health problems, would make it to the age of 150 in the year 1999. I don't recall hearing about anyone like that, however. McDaniel also makes other medical claims for the distant future (1999, again) which sound like what today's advocates of "nanomedicine" make for the 2020's and 2030's.

[Mind]

McDaniel also makes other medical claims for the distant future (1999, again) which sound like what today's advocates of "nanomedicine" make for the 2020's and 2030's.

Thanks for reminding everyone of poor past predictions Mark. It is eye-opening. It is also useful in order to see what progress we did see. It is not as if no progress has happened since 1955, just much less than some futurists had hoped/predicted.

[Futurist1000]

Does anyone else have difficulty trusting Robert Frietas?

He wrote this book;
Xenology may be defined as the scientific study of all aspects of extraterrestrial life, intelligence, and civilization.

I'm sorry, but that is a little out there. This is a pretty strange book, especially considering it is all pure speculation. It seems like he is a little too open to weird ideas. Not sure if this makes his judgement on nanorobotics somewhat suspect.

Anyways, he apparently has a new book out. You can read an excerpt from a chapter here.

Edited by Futurist1000, 05 July 2009 - 01:11 AM.

[advancedatheist]

Does anyone else have difficulty trusting Robert Frietas?

He wrote this book;
Xenology may be defined as the scientific study of all aspects of extraterrestrial life, intelligence, and civilization.

I'm sorry, but that is a little out there. This is a pretty strange book, especially considering it is all pure speculation. It seems like he is a little too open to weird ideas. Not sure if this makes his judgement on nanorobotics somewhat suspect.

In other words, Freitas can write entire books about stuff nobody has observed yet ("extraterrestrial life"), or else that nobody has built yet and has gotten to work reliably ("nanomedicine").

He sounds like a bullshitter to me.

[Kutta]

In other words, Freitas can write entire books about stuff nobody has observed yet ("extraterrestrial life"), or else that nobody has built yet and has gotten to work reliably ("nanomedicine").

He sounds like a bullshitter to me.

Believe it or not, all future technology, including our mundane 20 or something nanometer mass produced CPUs, are completely unobserved! Nobody has ever seen things like that! It's safe to say that they sound quite the bullshitters to me!

[forever freedom]

We students of the paleo-future have heard claims like Freitas's before. For example:

Medical Predictions for 1999 (1955), by a physician in Arkansas named Dr. Lowry H. McDaniel.

McDaniel back in 1955 predicted that in that far-future year 1999, people would have a "150-year span of life." Which I guess means that at least one individual aged 106 in the year 1955, despite his or health problems, would make it to the age of 150 in the year 1999. I don't recall hearing about anyone like that, however. McDaniel also makes other medical claims for the distant future (1999, again) which sound like what today's advocates of "nanomedicine" make for the 2020's and 2030's.

I love those things. Shows how easy it is for people to get carried away by recent advances in any area and project that in the future this area will be 10 times more advanced. People do this over and over again.

But what's most interesting is that with computers the exact opposite has happened. I don't think many people ever imagined that computers would get so powerful and so popular. With computing power predictions, "the shit is real". I just can't see how, once we have, in 2040, computers 1 billion times (or 1 trillion in 2050 or 1 quadrillion in 2060, whatever) more powerful than today's, we won't see strong AI coming into existence. After that, the rate of technology advance we saw until then will look like nothing compared to what will come.

Can anyone see any way we won't see strong AI if the current rate of computing power increase stays the same for the next decades? And can anyone deny that strong AI will change everything? The only way this picture of the future is not materializing is if the rate of advance of computing power starts decreasing for some reason. I'd love to hear arguments justifying why would anyone believe this would happen.

Edited by forever freedom, 07 July 2009 - 03:41 AM.

[niner]

I'm not sure what the relevance of one guy's predictions are, be they some backwoods doctor or a sci-fi kook. The more important thing might be: What are the projections of groups of knowledgeable people in the field? How much variance exists in their predictions and what is their accuracy record as a function of prediction length.

One of my favorites:

Today, a computer is the size of a house, and weighs 100,000 pounds. In the future, a computer will be the size of a garage, and weigh only 10,000 pounds.