Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Biotech Medicine Technology

3D Printing of Human Tissue To Spark Ethics Debate 234

Posted by Soulskill
from the your-liver-is-made-to-order dept.
Lucas123 writes "In a report released today, Gartner predicts that the time is drawing near when 3D-bioprinted human organs will be readily available, an advance almost certain to spark a complex debate involving a variety of political, moral and financial interests. For example, some researchers are using cells from human and non-human organs to create stronger tissue, said Pete Basiliere, a Gartner research director. 'In this example, there was human amniotic fluid, canine smooth muscle cells, and bovine cells all being used. Some may feel those constructs are of concern,' he said. While regulations in the U.S. and Europe will mean human trials of 3D printed organs will likely take up to a decade, nations with less stringent standards will plow ahead with the technology. For example, last August, the Hangzhou Dianzi University in China announced it had invented the biomaterial 3D printer Regenovo, which printed a small working kidney that lasted four months. Apart from printing tissue, 3D printing may also threaten intellectual property rights. 'IP will be ignored and it will be impossible or impractical to enforce. Everything will change when you can make anything.' said John Hornick, an IP attorney."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

3D Printing of Human Tissue To Spark Ethics Debate

Comments Filter:
  • by scorp1us (235526) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @05:26PM (#46103937) Journal

    We've "discovered" this material that is called Extra Celluar Matrix, which forms the scaffolding for organs. We can remove the organ's cells, leaving just this scaffolding. Then we can take a culture of cells from your own organ and use it to populate the scaffolding, resulting in an organ. .

    3D printing an organ is a much more complicated process. The only advantage is it does not require a donor XCM. But here's the cool thing about XCM, it doesn't trip the immune system, and the organ's cells are yours, so there is no rejection.

  • Re:IP freely (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CanHasDIY (1672858) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @05:31PM (#46104007) Homepage Journal

    But I deserve to have more wealth than any ten thousand other people on this planet combined!

    10,000?

    Try 3,500,000,000. [democracynow.org]

  • Re:HAHAHAHAHAHAHA (Score:4, Interesting)

    by femtobyte (710429) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @05:35PM (#46104059)

    Once it becomes cheap and easy for people to manufacture their own goods why the fuck would they buy expensive crap from big names.

    The same question could be asked today, not in some vague future "when it becomes cheap." Why do people by Coca-Cola or Pepsi-Cola cans, when the generic brand fizzy brown stuff (that performs equally well in blind tests) costs half as much? Why do people buy designer clothes labels, made in the same overseas sweatshops to the same shoddy standards as the "budget" brands? A large portion of present-day economic spending goes to wasteful expense, paying for "big names" brands whose biggest expense is paying for more ads to convince people the "big names" brands are better. If economy and quality of goods was a major concern, today's store shelves would look very different.

  • Re:IP freely (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CanHasDIY (1672858) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @05:39PM (#46104085) Homepage Journal

    "No. Stop. Quit turning natural ideas into assets to be bought, sold, lobbied-for, and speculated."

    It's bullshit anyway. 3D printing doesn't "threaten" copyrights or patents. It may be true that people might be able to make patented gadgets for their own home use... but that's already legal. And has been, as far as I know, for 200+ years.

    This.

    I can hand-carve Mickey Mouse figurines out of soap all day every day, and so long as I don't try to sell them, Disney can't do shit about it.

  • by ScottCooperDotNet (929575) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @05:48PM (#46104191)

    Why the sigh?

    Genital regeneration [wikipedia.org] may lead to the restoration of parts lost via genital mutilation. And science looks a lot more appealing than this foreskin restoration method [wikipedia.org]. NSFW.

You have a tendency to feel you are superior to most computers.

Working...