College Student Unveils Working Mass Effect Medi-Gel
- Thread starter Hevva
- Start date
Shepard: Remember the old days when you could just slap omni-gel on everything?DVS BSTrD said:
Liara: THAT security upgrade made a lot of people unhappy.
Sorry, had to do that.
Isn't science awesome guys?
Why is that sad? Star Wars has the minor substance of Bacta and Star Trek has something else as well. What else would "medi-gel" refer to?
[/quote]VanQ said:
Why is that sad? Star Wars has the minor substance of Bacta and Star Trek has something else as well. What else would "medi-gel" refer to?
I have to admit I'm highly dubious for a number of reasons.
1) It seems much too easy. Simply taking advantage of the extra-cellular matrix, huh? You mean that mix of mostly collagen? But the coagulation cascade would already be exposed to all those proteins, the coagulation cascade has already been well-described, and simply put this looks like way too easy a solution for it to have been missed before.
2) Burns have a completely different pathophys than hemorrhage. The proposed method for stopping hemorrhage at least has some basis for making a little sense. This really has none. Activating the coagulation cascade in a burn would do...absolutely nothing.
3) The only evidence I've seen is an incredibly easy to fake video. Seriously, any amateur magician can point out how that could have been done. (Notice the tube going up to the top cuts out from camera view? Put a stopcock there. Bam, effect complete.) Do I see a live animal, like I do on {WARNING: Very Graphic Quick Clot demonstrations [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9xvIbKBJn4])? Do I see comparisons to other compounds and bandages?
4) So where's the reputable science reporting? NYU, why isn't this on your page at www.nyu.edu? Science Daily? You got this one? PubMed? Any of the big science bloggers like Phil Plait? Anybody? Huh, seems all the reporting is coming from people using one source - the MNN one. And while I will offer no commentary on much of their work, good science reporting it is certainly not.
5) The writing style is just off. This is more of a personal sniff test than anything else, but this doesn't sound like it was the work of someone who knew their material.
6) Does the original article link back to real publications? Can you trace back to actual research? No. Broad claims, poor explanations, a little jargon, and an easily faked interwebs video. Color me unimpressed; I could put together a better fake medical miracle in four hours.
In short, I'd bet heavily hoax. And, you know, the typical really bad science discussions on The Escapist.
1) It seems much too easy. Simply taking advantage of the extra-cellular matrix, huh? You mean that mix of mostly collagen? But the coagulation cascade would already be exposed to all those proteins, the coagulation cascade has already been well-described, and simply put this looks like way too easy a solution for it to have been missed before.
2) Burns have a completely different pathophys than hemorrhage. The proposed method for stopping hemorrhage at least has some basis for making a little sense. This really has none. Activating the coagulation cascade in a burn would do...absolutely nothing.
3) The only evidence I've seen is an incredibly easy to fake video. Seriously, any amateur magician can point out how that could have been done. (Notice the tube going up to the top cuts out from camera view? Put a stopcock there. Bam, effect complete.) Do I see a live animal, like I do on {WARNING: Very Graphic Quick Clot demonstrations [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9xvIbKBJn4])? Do I see comparisons to other compounds and bandages?
4) So where's the reputable science reporting? NYU, why isn't this on your page at www.nyu.edu? Science Daily? You got this one? PubMed? Any of the big science bloggers like Phil Plait? Anybody? Huh, seems all the reporting is coming from people using one source - the MNN one. And while I will offer no commentary on much of their work, good science reporting it is certainly not.
5) The writing style is just off. This is more of a personal sniff test than anything else, but this doesn't sound like it was the work of someone who knew their material.
6) Does the original article link back to real publications? Can you trace back to actual research? No. Broad claims, poor explanations, a little jargon, and an easily faked interwebs video. Color me unimpressed; I could put together a better fake medical miracle in four hours.
In short, I'd bet heavily hoax. And, you know, the typical really bad science discussions on The Escapist.
The reason is that this is from NYU, it is from NYU Poly. They had actually been working this since their freshman year and even won first prize in a competition. Here is a link to 2 year old article on the said competition.thedoclc said:
Winning Student Inventors Tackle Medical Challenges [http://www.poly.edu/press-release/2011/04/11/winning-student-inventors-tackle-medical-challenges]
Well, it's a good thing that no one took me up on the bet, but I'm actually happy to be proven wrong on that one. But not terribly happy - that's not a great deal to go on.Happiness Assassin said:
Unfortunately I've yet to find anything on PubMed showing that it went further, which is kind of jarring since trials should in theory not be too difficult to run. Even the NYU-Poly site only lists it in that one article after searching for both Medi-gel and Veti-Gel. Also still nothing on the big sci sites. So so far, the only thing we see is a prize for someone trying this innovation at NYU-Poly, which is nice but rather limited.
So maybe they had limited success but not enough to displace other advanced hemostatic controls like chitosan. Or maybe they're in trials and waiting to publish. Or maybe a lack of commercial interest. For now, I'd say there's still no good evidence they had much success based on that link. I'd want more information. And I'd rather be wrong than right about that.
Now what are the odds we can have people who post science stories put the links to the actual reporting up?
Well it could stop the fire. And it could have its uses too. Ideally, we can live in a world with both, and have a skub-esque argument over which is better.soren7550 said:
What i really want is the life-extending shit they got in 40k. Every faction has higher-ups (or even grunts in some cases) that live into the centuries. Yes, even guardsmen commanders. Front line combat. Several Centuries. And they WIN!
Somebody is about to be swimming in loads of money.
You know how much the military will be spend to get the stuff?
You know how much the military will be spend to get the stuff?
SEE! VIDEOGAMES ARE ADVANCING OUR TECHNOLOGY! The government should get on this NOW! Start pumping out videogames like candy and give them away for free! HELP SAVE THE EARTH! PLAY VIDEOGAMES! XD
Joking aside, it could hopefully turn out to be a VERY useful and needed tool for future medical studies and applications.
Joking aside, it could hopefully turn out to be a VERY useful and needed tool for future medical studies and applications.
This is groundbreaking! But I wonder if there would be unforeseen consequences with allergic reactions or rejection if it's used on too big of a wound. Or problems with it breaking off and forming clots in the bloodstream. Iunno.
Still, if it all works out, I'm really looking forward to this being a part of everyday first aid kits. Just press Y to apply.
Still, if it all works out, I'm really looking forward to this being a part of everyday first aid kits. Just press Y to apply.
This is healing superficial, easily accessed injuries, isn't it?
We're not applying a magical salve to staunch the blood from a bullet wound. You plug someone up they're still going to bleed to death - it's called internal bleeding for a reason.
Ahh well, putting my initial suspicions aside, best of luck to the researchers and I hope they do well on this. It could maybe even provide the foundations of a whole new branch of surgical treatment - couple an injectible gel like this with keyhole surgery, for example?
If we could mix it up with stem cells etc we might be able to just 'fill in the blanks' on people needing transplants (cut it out, fill `em up).
EDIT:
Hrm .. I mentioned keyhole surgery (laparoscopy) ... just did a little research and it seems that from initial experiments on dogs in the earliest days of the 20th century through to the first recorded laparoscopic appendectomy was around 80 years.
Science moves faster these days, of course - but the bureaucracy and testing of medical technology doesn't, as time has to pass before something can be given an 'all clear' for use.
We're not applying a magical salve to staunch the blood from a bullet wound. You plug someone up they're still going to bleed to death - it's called internal bleeding for a reason.
Ahh well, putting my initial suspicions aside, best of luck to the researchers and I hope they do well on this. It could maybe even provide the foundations of a whole new branch of surgical treatment - couple an injectible gel like this with keyhole surgery, for example?
If we could mix it up with stem cells etc we might be able to just 'fill in the blanks' on people needing transplants (cut it out, fill `em up).
EDIT:
Hrm .. I mentioned keyhole surgery (laparoscopy) ... just did a little research and it seems that from initial experiments on dogs in the earliest days of the 20th century through to the first recorded laparoscopic appendectomy was around 80 years.
Science moves faster these days, of course - but the bureaucracy and testing of medical technology doesn't, as time has to pass before something can be given an 'all clear' for use.
Really the real question as some people have already pointed out is whether or not it is biodegradable. If not then it is still very impressive as it will keep you alive long enough to get to some real help, but it would be near useless on small cuts and whatnot, so no miracle healing gel for you!
LMAO, the funny thing is we already had Medi-Gel. Ask any carpenter about cuts and super glue. Heck for that matter we have self adhesive bandages in the form of duct tape everywhere (once again ask a construction worker). I can't tell you the number of injuries I've had that I've either taped over or sealed with glue. The funny thing... Its actually sterile. That is why we do it, we are working outside and we don't want any open wounds to get infected. I won't pretend it is anywhere as effective as this new stuff, I am sure that there are plenty of medical advances applied to it, but when you are in the field you use what you can, and I highly doubt the military will see it as "cost effective". Hell we've had much better body armor than our basic troops carry normally, but it isn't "cost effective".
Just my 2c
Just my 2c