Science Renders Breathing Obsolete

[Deadyawn]

"Some of the most convincing experiments were the early ones," he says. "We drew each other's blood, mixed it in a test tube with the microparticles, and watched blue blood turn immediately red, right before our eyes."

Maybe someone can explain this to me. I've never really been good with how the pigmentation of blood works. There isn't any actual "blue" blood, right? Or is it possible to make blood appear blue in an oxygen-free environment?

Yeah... now I'm confused. I learned in school that vein blood was blue, then in college that it wasn't really and people were just mistaken. I've also given blood to the Red Cross, and they pull that from your veins into a vacuum (so no oxygen addition), and it's definitely not blue.

So I looked it up. [http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2008/02/11/is-blood-ever-blue-science-tea/] If by "blue" you mean "darker red", then it sounds like blood can be blue. But if by "blue" you mean, you know, "blue", then no, that's just the vein color.

I don't know what Kheir is talking about. He's either assuming people think de-oxygenated blood is blue and speaking appropriately, totally unclear about the meaning of color, or he dyed the blood.

Or I've been lied to by the internet.

Yeah, it's kind of confusing.

As I understand it, blood is red all the time due to the fact that (aside from the plasma which has very little colour) it's almost entirely made of red blood cells. The shade of red varies from bright red (oxygenated) to dull red (deoxygenated).

Veins on the other hand are...also red. They just look blue because of the light refracting through the skin. If you were to pull one out it would normally look red. At least, I think thats how it works as far as I can remember.

 

[x EvilErmine x]

They've invented LCL. We're one step closer to Evangelion's nightmare future.

LCL must have had some type of special agent which would have been able to directly interface with the lungs. The human body can't withstand water in the lungs, because it can't extract the oxygen.

It's not that we can't extract the oxygen, we can. Oxygen will defuse into the blood from the water as long as a concentration gradient exists. The problem is that water is much denser than air. So we when we exhaust the free oxygen in the water we can not get it out of our lungs as the lungs do not posses muscles that are strong enough.

 

[wgar]

In 20 years, the breathing goop from The Abyss really going to happen?

You know that was an actual scene for the rat; it was method acting?

 

[DaRigger420]

As an Asthmatic I'm quite pleased with this development...

As a fellow asthmatic, I agree whole-heartedly (or should that be whole-lungedly). Imagin if in addition to emergency inhalers we had an eppy-pen-like device to inject this during an attack. Epic Win.

And on a side note, this is yet another science fiction Star Trek device that is becoming science fact. The idea of an injectable oxygen supplement (aka tri-ox) was introduced to the world decades ago through the visionary works of people imagining a better future.

Ok now scientests of the world, get busy on those holo-deck devices and personal shuttlecraft!

 

[Li Mu]

Now I know the Escapist is hardly known for it's good headlines (which tend to range from sensationalist to being outright lies) but I wonder if you guys really have a full grasp of the English language.

Just to help out, the dictionary definition of 'obsolete' is this;

no longer in general use; fallen into disuse: an obsolete expression.

And yet a couple of paragraphs down from your headline you state;

Science Renders Breathing Obsolete

However, this is not a permanent setup - the fluid that carries the microparticles would eventually overload the blood if used for over half an hour, said project lead Dr. John Kheir.



Permalink

Which very much means that breathing is still very vogue.

I'm relatively confident that you just do this to be sensationalist, but is it really necessary?
It doesn't make you a better writer and it doesn't make the article any more or less interesting. Are you desperate to get a job at some low brow media outlet and want to show just how misleading you can be?

I'm half expecting a headline to read "GABE NEWELL IS DEAD"
And then for the body to read, "...dead excited to have so many fans."

 

[Strazdas]

And this the ability to sustain brain without a biological body begins, otherwise known as cyborgs.
Also, this mean we can now trasnplant brains.

Spoiler: Its time

 

[Arkynomicon]

This is actually pretty incredible and newsworthy.

 

[MammothBlade]

Brilliant, now I can keep suffocating my victims for longer!

And no one cares about the animals they 'used' to find this out?

No. They fulfilled a good purpose in the name of human science. They are honoured by this positive outcome of the research.

 

[Shinsei-J]

Wow this is pretty breath taking stuff.

 

[ThatLankyBastard]

I gotta wonder...
... How did they test this out? I get the worst mental images when I think about it...

More seriously though, this is a great scientific breakthrough and I'm sure it will save many lives!

 

[eddyshore6528]

The first thing that came to mind when I started reading this article was the film Abyss, the scene where they make the protagonist 'breathe' some kind of liquid to get him to be able to dive deep enough to disarm the nuke they sent on top of an alien spaceship.

Don't know why, but I thought about this kind of application rather than a medical emergency one.

I wonder how the brain would react, if the impulse to fill your lungs would overwhelm you if the blood keeps being saturated with oxygen, or if you could just be able to hold your breath as long as you're plugged in.

I also wonder what happens with the CO2 the blood brings back to your lungs to be expelled, how to get rid of it if you're not breathing? It must get toxic quite rapidly if your cells keep burning oxygen without a way to get rid of the combustion residue.

 

[SenseOfTumour]

Call me a dummy, but I'd guess the next step an IV on the other side of the body, after the blood's passed thru the heart, drawing the blood from the body, filtering out the oxygen carrying fluid and then pumping it back in.

I'm also fairly sure my idea would kill lots of people.

Still, it works in my head

 

[Denamic]

"Some of the most convincing experiments were the early ones," he says. "We drew each other's blood, mixed it in a test tube with the microparticles, and watched blue blood turn immediately red, right before our eyes."

Maybe someone can explain this to me. I've never really been good with how the pigmentation of blood works. There isn't any actual "blue" blood, right? Or is it possible to make blood appear blue in an oxygen-free environment?

Yeah... now I'm confused. I learned in school that vein blood was blue, then in college that it wasn't really and people were just mistaken. I've also given blood to the Red Cross, and they pull that from your veins into a vacuum (so no oxygen addition), and it's definitely not blue.

So I looked it up. [http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2008/02/11/is-blood-ever-blue-science-tea/] If by "blue" you mean "darker red", then it sounds like blood can be blue. But if by "blue" you mean, you know, "blue", then no, that's just the vein color.

I don't know what Kheir is talking about. He's either assuming people think de-oxygenated blood is blue and speaking appropriately, totally unclear about the meaning of color, or he dyed the blood.

Or I've been lied to by the internet.

It's medical short-hand for referring to blood that isn't carrying oxygen.
It's faster and easier to say.

 

[vxicepickxv]

They've invented LCL. We're one step closer to Evangelion's nightmare future.

LCL must have had some type of special agent which would have been able to directly interface with the lungs. The human body can't withstand water in the lungs, because it can't extract the oxygen.

... you breath liquid for the first nine months or so of your life.

[sub]Yes I know your lungs aren't actually THERE for a good chunk of it, just... shut up.[/sub]

And no one cares about the animals they 'used' to find this out?

In a word? No.

In more words? Yes, but would you rather test it on humans and then find out it does horrible things to your veins and makes you explode?

Amniotic fluid isn't the exact same composition as water. I'm pretty sure there is some kind of special chemical that allows the bonded oxygen to switch over to the lungs, once they're formed.

 

[John Funk]

Now I know the Escapist is hardly known for it's good headlines (which tend to range from sensationalist to being outright lies) but I wonder if you guys really have a full grasp of the English language.

Just to help out, the dictionary definition of 'obsolete' is this;

no longer in general use; fallen into disuse: an obsolete expression.

And yet a couple of paragraphs down from your headline you state;

Science Renders Breathing Obsolete

However, this is not a permanent setup - the fluid that carries the microparticles would eventually overload the blood if used for over half an hour, said project lead Dr. John Kheir.



Permalink

Which very much means that breathing is still very vogue.

I'm relatively confident that you just do this to be sensationalist, but is it really necessary?
It doesn't make you a better writer and it doesn't make the article any more or less interesting. Are you desperate to get a job at some low brow media outlet and want to show just how misleading you can be?

I'm half expecting a headline to read "GABE NEWELL IS DEAD"
And then for the body to read, "...dead excited to have so many fans."

Simmer down, Francis.

The hed was a way to A.) convey the general idea of the article in a very short phrase, B.) be interesting and catch one's attention, and C.) be fun and entertaining.

Don't take things so seriously all the time.

 

[Li Mu]

I think you'll find that the internet is serious bizzniss! >:-| Perhaps the most serious bizzniss in the world.

 

[Azuaron]

"Some of the most convincing experiments were the early ones," he says. "We drew each other's blood, mixed it in a test tube with the microparticles, and watched blue blood turn immediately red, right before our eyes."

Maybe someone can explain this to me. I've never really been good with how the pigmentation of blood works. There isn't any actual "blue" blood, right? Or is it possible to make blood appear blue in an oxygen-free environment?

Yeah... now I'm confused. I learned in school that vein blood was blue, then in college that it wasn't really and people were just mistaken. I've also given blood to the Red Cross, and they pull that from your veins into a vacuum (so no oxygen addition), and it's definitely not blue.

So I looked it up. [http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2008/02/11/is-blood-ever-blue-science-tea/] If by "blue" you mean "darker red", then it sounds like blood can be blue. But if by "blue" you mean, you know, "blue", then no, that's just the vein color.

I don't know what Kheir is talking about. He's either assuming people think de-oxygenated blood is blue and speaking appropriately, totally unclear about the meaning of color, or he dyed the blood.

Or I've been lied to by the internet.

It's medical short-hand for referring to blood that isn't carrying oxygen.
It's faster and easier to say.

Ah, using jargon with the press. Always a good idea.

 

[The Great JT]

Medical Science, keep up the good work. Geology, your grades are slipping.