Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Science

Detoxing With Magnets for Fun and Profit 287

Ridgelift writes "Wired has an article on a new way to remove toxins from the bloodstream. The Argonne National Laboratory have designed nanoparticles which 'identify, and then latch onto, target molecules. The nanoparticles are injected into the bloodstream, where they circulate through the body, picking up their target toxins as they go. Once they have made their rounds, all that's needed to remove the particles from the body are a magnet housed in a handheld unit and a small, dual-channel shunt inserted into an arm or leg artery.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Detoxing With Magnets for Fun and Profit

Comments Filter:
  • by Ridgelift ( 228977 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:30PM (#7662617)
    Magneto: Something's different, today... [Holds up a hand, and the guard freezes] Too much iron in your blood! [filmhobbit.com]
    • Re:X2 a Reality (Score:2, Informative)

      by Clever Pun ( 729719 )
      I was just thinking that - if you have an overabundance of iron in your diet, would this system pull out your red blood cells and just pump the empty plasma back into you? (In case you didn't know, iron is used by your body largely to make Hemoglobin, which is what red blood cells are made from. Other primary uses are to make Myoglobin, and within enzyme systems.)
      • Re:X2 a Reality (Score:3, Informative)

        by geeveees ( 690232 )
        And Hemoglobin contains a Fe atom so that it can bind with O2, this allows red blood cells to transport a lot more oxygen. So the downside to this would be the same as CO-poisoning (the Fe binds with the CO, not with O. This binding lasts a long time, you die...).
      • Re:X2 a Reality (Score:5, Informative)

        by Carnildo ( 712617 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:44PM (#7662765) Homepage Journal
        The iron in hemoglobin isn't magnetic, so this won't have any more effect on blood cells than the "improve your circulation" magnets do.
        • Re:X2 a Reality (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Roger_Wilco ( 138600 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @05:01PM (#7662927) Homepage

          Well, that's sort of right.

          De-oxygenated hemoglobin isn't magnetic, but oxygenated hemoglobic is paramagnetic. That's why fMRI works. fMRI is a clever technique using the same MRI technology used for imaging, but tuned to see changes in blood oxygen concentration. It's used to estimate brain activity, and also to detect poor circulation in the heart.

          • Re:X2 a Reality (Score:2, Insightful)

            by jcp797 ( 656922 )
            actually, oxygenated hemoglobin is diamagnetic.
          • Re:X2 a Reality (Score:5, Informative)

            by Sgt York ( 591446 ) <jvolm@earthli[ ]net ['nk.' in gap]> on Monday December 08, 2003 @05:26PM (#7663149)
            MRI [mawebcenters.com] does not [faseb.org] look for iron. [ncifcrf.gov] It's based on certain isotopes and how they behave in a magnetic and RF fields, mostly hydrogen and oxygen.

            The short of it is that atoms spin on an axis, and if you put atoms in a strong magnetic field, their spin axes will mostly line up. Adding a strong RF pulse will "tip" them in one direction (like tipping a spinning top) and they will precess while going back to alignment with the field. This precession can be picked up as a seperate RF emission, and the nature of the emission from each atom will be affected by what atoms are around it. It's the same concept as NMR, just that medical MRI looks for the specific signature of water, finding differences in tissue density.

          • Re:X2 a Reality (Score:3, Informative)

            by k98sven ( 324383 )
            De-oxygenated hemoglobin isn't magnetic, but oxygenated hemoglobic is paramagnetic.

            Let's clarify this for all the non chemist/physicist-readers here..
            Simplified, there are three forms of magnetism, ferromagnetism, paramagnetism and diamagnetism.

            Ferromagnetism is what we ususally mean when we speak of something being 'magnetic'.
            The other two are mainly molecular phenomena, and are very weak.

            Molecular oxygen is paramagnetic. This doesn't mean there is more air near your refrigerator. At least not under no
      • Re:X2 a Reality (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        The iron is not magnetic (or at least only very slightly) while in hemoglobin.

        Informative? Mod it informative when you know what the hell you're talking about.
      • Re:X2 a Reality (Score:3, Informative)

        by Sgt York ( 591446 )
        First, it would take more force than is exerted by most megnetic fields to remove iron from heme. And the mass of the hemoglobin is too great to be moved by the same force.

        Second, if you have an overabundance of iron in your diet, you just poop more iron. Unlike most other nutrients, your body only absorbs what iron it needs. Iron is a dangerous thing to have too much of, for reasons unrelated to magnetism. The best way to get more iron in your blood is to move to a high altitude.

  • by panxerox ( 575545 ) * on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:30PM (#7662618)
    need is a car mounted version so I can plug in saturday night after a round at the bars. hmm mabee they could shunt the removed "products" directly to my carborator.. Profit !
    • Re:Now all they.. (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Uncle Sam wont let it pass though, as they make a ton of money on DUI's. I cant see the senators letting this "taxation" go away. In MN last year, we had over 200,000 DUI's (More than the population of Minneapolis!). Multiply this by $1500 (lucky average), and you'll see that it is not a small amount of bling-bling that our polititions can wear. I too thought the same thing, but then realized what kind of $$ is at stake. Not a snowballs chance in hell. In fact, we are now in the process of bringing the DUI
      • by Anonymous Coward
        and blew a .096,


        There's your problem. Next time, blow the cop a 69.

  • What about... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mgcsinc ( 681597 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:31PM (#7662626)
    The article mentions simple, nice uses such as detoxing or removing poisons from the bloodstream, but what prevents a similar method from being designed (all be it you would have to design particles corresponding to these to be in the bloodstream) to remove viral infections from the blood? That seems like where the real interest in this technology would be!
    • Re:What about... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by KrispyKringle ( 672903 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:35PM (#7662669)
      I'm no doctor, but I'd make a couple of guesses:

      It seems like if the effectiveness weren't 100%, it may not matter for detox, since it may get the toxin levels below tolerance, but for a virus, it may simply meet as soon as you stop, the virus spreads again.

      It may be far harder to make things to bond to the virus. The particles being bonded to may have well known chemical properties, but it seems like if it were that simple to make things bond to viruses, we'd have little problem treating them, magnet or no.

      Just a guess, though. Anyone here actually know about this stuff? :P

      • Re:What about... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by KrispyKringle ( 672903 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:39PM (#7662701)
        But there are a few comments about treating auto-immune diseases and anthrax. So maybe it's useful as an intermediary treatment for some easily-targeted particles, but doesn't completely remove an infection?
      • Re:What about... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Eskarel ( 565631 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:43PM (#7662752)
        Well the body can produce things which bond to specific viruses those things are called anti-bodies and are relatively effective for most diseases spread by viruses(excluding those which kill too fast or attack the immune system(HIV)) but you're probably right it wouldn't be all that effective and there are probably better ways to do it.

        The thing I would be interested to see is a cancer treatment based on this idea. Not to actually cure cancer since I don't think that's possible with this method but to pick up the cancerous cells in the bloodstream and prevent them from spreading cancer to other parts of the body. A lot of times it's when the cancers have metastecized(no idea of spelling) to other parts of the body that you get the real problems. Not to mention it might reduce the chances of cancer recurring.

        • Re:What about... (Score:3, Informative)

          by Carnildo ( 712617 )
          It can catch cancer cells in the bloodstream, but it won't catch those spreading by the lymph system.

          And for future reference, it's "metastasized".
        • Re:What about... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by StringBlade ( 557322 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @05:11PM (#7663010) Journal
          I would be leary about dragging cancerous cells out of the body using magnets unless that magnetic field was strong enough and it could be shown that none of the particles are left behind along the "exit route". If the magnet were to drop any of the cancer cells after relocating them from some other area you may actually be spreading the cancer much faster than it would have done itself.
      • Re:What about... (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Sgt York ( 591446 )
        The clearance issue wouldn't be that big of a deal. All you need to do is help out the immune system some, clear a large portion of the viral particles and your system can fight off the rest after the load has dropped. For example, many antibiotics only inhibit the growth of bacteria, they don't actually kill them. This allows the immune system to "catch up" with the bugs in the body.

        It may be more difficult to make it bind specifically to the virus, but I suppose you could use an antibody fragment for sp

      • Re:What about... (Score:5, Informative)

        by mec ( 14700 ) <mec@shout.net> on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:59PM (#7662902) Journal
        [I'm only about one or two Scientific American articles ahead of you, so let's hope that a real molecular biology geek shows up].

        This is what antibodies are for. You need to make an antibody that has a very high specific affinity for the virus and a lower affinity for friendly cells. (Nature does this by generating large numbers of antibodies at random, then filtering out antibodies that show reactivity with your own cells. All the rest are let loose in the body).

        Then you attach the magnetized tag on the other end of the antibody.

        The antibody attaches to the virus in a death grip, and then the little black box can filter out the magnetized tag.

        You don't have to remove 100% of the virus load to cure somebody. You just have to get a lot of the virus so that the body's natural immune system can fight the rest.

        Indeed, other groups have tried the antibody idea with different payloads, such as a radioactive atom bonded onto the antibody. The antibody attaches to the virus or the cancer cell, then the radioactive atom decays right there next to the bad cell.
      • Re:What about... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by hollo32 ( 213966 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @09:59PM (#7665322)

        I'm no doctor, but I'd make a couple of guesses:

        Well I am a doctor, but it's not really my field and I've had a few drinks. I'll have a go anyway.

        There are two problems with this technique for dealing with viruses like HIV. One is that viruses can only reproduce inside human cells and spend most of their time there. None of these nanoparticles are going to be able to get inside the cells so they are not going to get to where the virus is. Instead there is the much trickier task of detecting cells which have the virus inside.

        The other problem is that the HIV virus in particular appears to mutate very rapidly. There is one part of the outside of the virus capsule which has to stay the same as it binds strongly to a particular protein on the outside of the cells it is going to infect in order to attach to them. This region which stays the same is flanked by areas that change rapidly from generation to generation to make it difficult for the body to recognise the virus.

    • Re:What about... (Score:5, Informative)

      by KiwiEngineer ( 585036 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:41PM (#7662732) Journal
      I, too had similar thoughts, but in order to not appear redundant in my post I decided to find out the particle size of a typical virus.

      I found this at drgreene.com

      Viruses range in size from 20 to 250 nanometers

      The average bacterium is 1,000 nanometers long.

      If a bacterium were my size, a typical virus particle would look like a tiny mouse-robot. If an average virus were my size, a bacterium would be the size of a dinosaur over ten stories tall.

      It could be a scale thing taht means this first generation of magnetic detox devices are too large to pick up virus particles. i don't know what sort of % you would need to remove of a viral infection compared to a bacterial infection to ensure a recovery by the casualty, but suspect it would be a lot higher for a virus.

      Another problem could lie in the changing nature of viruses, making them a harder target to select for when designing your magnetised particles.

      It would be a wonderful application if it works.
      • The article also discusses the removal of things like drugs. The scale there is similar; the size of a virus is to the size of a drug molecule as the size of a bacterium is to the size of a virus (Hey! I'm the SAT!).

        I would imagine these particles would have more difficulty with larger particles. The magnetic attraction would have to overcome intertia.

    • One of the problems that our natural immune system has with viruses, and I assume this new system would have the same issue, is that they "reproduce" inside our own cells and are often encapsulated with that cells own lipid layer before being released, in other words they chemicaly 'look' like a normal cell and are not affected by our immune system.

      Another problem this technique would have is that the real nasty viruses tend to merge their DNA into our DNA and can become latent for many years. Chicken p
    • That's all fine and dandy until the virus mutates into some uber-efficient cyborg, hacking its systems and improving co-operation with all the other cyborg virus cells in your body. Finally broadcasting straight into your ear "resistance is futile..." and, what's that? Oh nano-particles, not nano-bots? Bummer.
    • The problem with trying to design an antibody, or treatment for any virus is that there is not a constant target for them. They change over time.

      This is also why you have to get a new flu shot (vaccine) every year. It's not that the old ones stopped working, it's that the flu has changed enough from its previous form for your body to not be able to fight it with the tools it has at hand.

      The time it would take to design a molecule that would bind specifically enough to the particular virus in your body a
  • Finally! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Theatetus ( 521747 ) * on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:32PM (#7662639) Journal

    Something to do with all these spare small, dual-channel arterial shunts I have lying around...

  • by Carnildo ( 712617 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:32PM (#7662643) Homepage Journal
    Finally, an actual medical benefit from magnets!
    • Sadly (Score:2, Insightful)

      by taniwha ( 70410 )
      the magnet-quack people will probably start quoting this as a wonderfull scientific study that proves what they've been saying for years .... and most people wont read past the headlines ....
      • by Theatetus ( 521747 ) * on Monday December 08, 2003 @06:00PM (#7663436) Journal

        Even scientists don't read past headlines anymore, it seems (or journal abstracts, in their case).

        I read a cool study about the influence of journal abstracts. They looked at all the surveys of the correlation between saturated fat consumption and heart disease. One early study showed there was a correlation between consuming saturated fats and heart disease. Just about every subsequent study has concluded the same thing. However, the data they actually presented in the article almost always showed the opposite; that saturated fat consumption reduces heart disease rates.

        But, all any of the peer reviewers read is the abstract. So, the myth keeps strengthening itself. I'd love to see similar studies in areas other than nutrition.

        It's not just the peasants who accept things uncritically.

  • MRI (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Evil Adrian ( 253301 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:34PM (#7662653) Homepage
    I wonder how long you wouldn't be allowed to get an MRI for... I'd imagine those little beasties would tear you apart if you got one!
    • Re:MRI (Score:5, Interesting)

      by mariox19 ( 632969 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @05:19PM (#7663067)

      As I understand it, hospitals are reluctant to give some construction workers MRI's as the average worker is sure to have accumulated tiny metal shards in his or her eyes, shards that go unnoticed until someone turns on the juice.

      The MRI question for all of this is a good one.

  • Oh great... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Conspiracy_Of_Doves ( 236787 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:34PM (#7662655)
    Now those people selling the magnetic bracelets and insoles are going to be using this as 'proof' that their useless peices of crap really work.
  • Really stupid idea (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    The body would attack those things because they are foreign, and even if they are inert then you have the problem of them getting stuck in strange places, like your brain.

    Wouldn't want to get an MRI after either, half your body would probably be torn apart.
    • Oh, RTA... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Snootch ( 453246 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:52PM (#7662843)
      The body would attack those things because they are foreign

      Read the article, my friend - they're coated so they don't get recognised as antigens. Nor will they get stuck (they took care over this one, designed wuith reference to pore sizes), and in any case are biodegradable.
      • The body would attack those things because they are foreign

        Read the article, my friend - they're coated so they don't get recognised as antigens. Nor will they get stuck (they took care over this one, designed wuith reference to pore sizes), and in any case are biodegradable.


        I read it too, and I see a couple problems with the claims.

        First: While the propylene glycol coating will protect the basic particle (for a while), the active antibodies that cause it to latch onto targets have to stick out. If
    • um. no.

      just no, dude.

      1) It says in the article that they are specifically coated to prevent immune response.

      2) They can't pass the blood brain barrier, because they're too big.

      3) The whole thing is supposed to break down in like 5 hours, at which point the iron can be incorporated into your body.
  • by numbski ( 515011 ) * <numbskiNO@SPAMhksilver.net> on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:35PM (#7662667) Homepage Journal
    Take Chaser 2 shortly after you begin drinking, and drink all night long!

    The next morning, just insert the handy-dandy magetized needle, and lookie! Hangover-over!
    • The next morning, just insert the handy-dandy magetized needle, and lookie! Hangover-over!

      Not quite.

      Hangovers are caused by your body being dehydrated. To fix the worst of the effect, drink lots of water (preferably the night before) or, if you happen to be an EMT, stick some saline solution right into your blood.
      • by Lafe ( 595258 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:59PM (#7662905) Homepage
        Hangovers are caused by your body being dehydrated. To fix the worst of the effect, drink lots of water (preferably the night before) or, if you happen to be an EMT, stick some saline solution right into your blood.

        Not quite.

        Hangovers are caused by your body producing acetaldehyde as it metabolizes alcohol. Dehydration does play a role, but it is a supporting role.

        A good description of what happens, and good advice on what to do about it can be found here [soyouwanna.com].

        Alternatively, you can pick up the RU-21 pill [ru-21.net] designed by the KGB to keep their agents from getting hangovers.
        • So keying the nanoparticals to acetaldehyde would work?

          <cartman>schweet</cartman>
        • by Chris Burke ( 6130 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @07:12PM (#7664176) Homepage
          In case you are caught unprepared without your Ultimate Hangover Cure (nice link btw), chugging several Big Gulps full of water before hitting the sack is a tremendous help. Most of the hangover symptoms (headaches, nausea, dry mouth, aching joints) are either caused or exacerbated by the dehydration that results from drinking. Even if you're lacking B-complex vitamins and a way to neutralize the acetaldehyde, 40 oz of water will go a long, long way toward making the next day as pleasant as possible.

          People may not believe this, since drinking water on the day after does very little to make the hangover go away. Trust me, chug water before going to bed.

          Oh, and since your web link didn't have this piece of advice, I add it here: Avoid tequila like the demon-spawned liquor of evil that it is.

          Or at least don't mix it with beer.
      • We had this discussion in EMT class. At least here, EMT's don't get to do IVs. So the EMT hangover fix is lots of high-flow O2. The paramedic hangover fix, on the other hand, involves saline, dextrose, and some sort of vitamin complex I think, plus high-flow O2.
  • by Raul654 ( 453029 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:37PM (#7662691) Homepage
    I heard a saying: The 20th century was the century of physics. The 21st century will be the biology and medicine.

    If you think about it, that's amazingly true. At the begining of the 20th century, Think about all we discovered - the atom bomb, computers, television, etc. Contrast that with our treatment of disease, which is rudementary at best. Just wait until genetic therapy become available, or disease attacking bacteriophages, or artificialy grown organs. I think medicine is in for revolution.
  • by Asprin ( 545477 ) <gsarnoldNO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:39PM (#7662702) Homepage Journal

    magnetic water?


    HA-HAHAHAHAHA HOHOHOHO HEE!

    My wife actually knows someone that drinks 'magnetic water' to remove various unnamed 'toxins' from her body. Weird.
    • My wife actually knows someone that drinks 'magnetic water' to remove various unnamed 'toxins' from her body. Weird.

      Well, water does have magnetic properties... IIRC, it's a combination of H+ and OH- ions. Of course, since they come in pairs, the effect is neutralized, but at some level the water *is* "magnetic".

      It could be worse. Her friend could have lived in the days of Crazy Water. In Mineral Wells, Texas [utexas.edu], the local water had a more direct "cleansing" effect. The water's strength was directly mea
      • by Asprin ( 545477 ) <gsarnoldNO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:58PM (#7662895) Homepage Journal

        It's been a few years since I had to think about this, but I think that's an electric dipole moment, not a magnetic moment you're thinking of.

        As I remember it, the 'V' shaped arrangement (H-O-H) of the atoms in the H2O molecule result in a slight misalignment of the electron clouds of the atoms, causing a small electric dipole moment capable of bonding other nearby similarly configured molecules into chains. It's responsible for the hydrogen bonding that gives water its viscosity.
      • There are three types of magnetism in substances:

        Ferromagnetism: This is what we'd call magnetic normally. things like iron or some advanced ceramics are this. It is a strongly magnetic material.

        Dimagnetic: This is completely non-magnetic. Helium would be a good example. Most people think that everything that isn't ferromagnetic is in this category but it's not.

        Paramagnetic: This is a very weak magnetic attraction. Much, much weaker than something that is ferromagnetic, but still influenced by magnets. W
    • I have to say, this article is the exception that proves Waggoner's eleventh law: "Any reference to 'toxins' as a generic class is in the service to someone selling a bogus pseudo-medical treatment."

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:39PM (#7662703)
    Finally, a drug-free school zone with teeth. Just say no! Or not. We'll get you either way.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    ...why my tinfoil hat was sucked into my ear after my doctors appointment.
  • by karmaflux ( 148909 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:39PM (#7662708)
    So is this research sponsored by Jiffy Lube?

    "Remember, get your oil and your small arterial shunt changed every three months or three thousand miles."
  • DARPA redeemed (Score:4, Interesting)

    by RobertB-DC ( 622190 ) * on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:40PM (#7662719) Homepage Journal
    At the end of the article was some interesting information:
    The research is sponsored by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency [darpa.mil] and the U.S. Department of Energy [doe.gov].

    Perhaps this will help DARPA regain some of its cachet after the embarassingly stupid gaffe by Terror Bookie [counterpunch.org] John Poindexter. Got to take the bad with the good, I guess... it's nice to be reminded that the Internet isn't all DARPA ever helped get off the ground.
  • Why wait? (Score:3, Funny)

    by jimcooncat ( 605197 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:41PM (#7662723)
    "Kaminski said Food and Drug Administration trials will start in five years." Why do we have to wait five years? We need open source drug development. Yeah, it's dangerous, but so is rocketry.
    • FDA trials will begin in 5 years. That's for human testing. These will probably be perfected in little furry guys first (mice, rats), then move up to big furry guys (monkeys), then to big fur-less guys (us).
  • by Raul654 ( 453029 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:41PM (#7662726) Homepage
    How long until we get the full borg suit? (And for the record, I call dibbs on 7 of 9)
  • Great news! (Score:3, Funny)

    by teamhasnoi ( 554944 ) <teamhasnoi@yahoo. c o m> on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:45PM (#7662777) Journal
    Now they can cure Jake 2.0, and we won't have to watch that crap anymore!

    BTW - Jake, if you're reading this, that doctor chick totally has the hots for you, dude...

  • by johnthorensen ( 539527 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:47PM (#7662786)
    December 9, 2013

    Drug Abusers Use Nanotechnology to Duck Routine Screening Tests
    It seems that a technology poised to replace dialysis and other blood-purifying procedures has been hijacked to thwart detection of illegal substances in the bloodstream. Using magnetic nanoparticles, drug abusers can pull every last trace of an illegal substance from their system before submitting to the test.

    "I first found about this from a friend in L.A.," says black marketeer Hans Gruber. "We are right now mixing cocktails to strip barbituates, THC, amphetamines, you name it. It's going to give a big boost to the illegal drug industry - people don't have to worry about being caught at work anymore".

    On the other side of the issue, security analysts believe that surprise screening tests are the solution to this new development. Informing a candidate that they will be required to submit to a test immediately will help catch some of the would-be "nano-cheaters".

    "Yeah, you could do surprise tests...or I could just offer a nanostripper with every drug purchase, to be run immediately after the customer comes down off their high." Such a practice still wouldn't let people go to work while intoxicated, but would keep them from getting picked up Monday morning for their Saturday night indescrecions.

    It is unknown just how soon these "nanostrippers" will be readily available on the black market, but given the ease with which they can be synthesized, it is expected that production methods similar to the "meth labs" of the '00s could be employed. Even more interesting is the fact that the molecules are only regarded as Class C Nanoproducts under the Nanotechnology Protection Act of 2018, so very little punishment could be currently handed out for their synthesis and/or possession.
    • oops..that Nanotechnology Protection Act should have been passed in the year 2008 - sorry, got my dates mixed up :)
    • by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:57PM (#7662884) Homepage Journal
      The problem with nanostrippers is that you need a very high-power microscope to see them grinding on their carbon nanotube pole.
    • 10 years? Not quite.

      It's December 8th. You're one day off.
    • by BigRedFish ( 676427 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @05:34PM (#7663213)

      December 10, 2013
      part II in a series

      Corporate Managers Confounded by Nanotechnology's Defeat of Drug Testing
      The effect of nano-detox on corporate America has prompted uncertainty in HR departments across the USA.

      "I'm confused by it," said Project Manager Mark Greene. "It used to be, I knew what was expected of me. Promote guys who dress like me, hire women I consider f--kable. If anyone fails random urinalysis, fire them."

      Now, I don't know what to do," he continued. "If the drug tests don't work, how am I supposed to know whether my employees are doing their jobs adequately? I might have to... what's the word, it starts with T, the, that... THINK. That's it. I'd have to think of a way to keep track of what my employees are doing at work. That's not the job of a manager as I understand it, and they sure didn't teach us to think in Business School. I was hired because I look good in a suit."

      Some business analysts have suggested that the impact to the corporate bottom line could be huge.

      "Let's face it," said Joanna Goldstein, of the market analysis firm Goldstein & Meyers, "This could add a lot to the cost of middle and upper level management."

      "It already costs almost $10 million a year to put someone in that management chair," she continued. "If that person has to also be able to track ongoing corporate projects under his control, plus think of a way to determine which employees are performing other than by what they like to do on the week-end, it could add a lot to the cost of executive talent."

      "Without that litmus test, management will have to pay attention, be realistic, and exercise some critical thought. Good luck finding an MBA with those skills, and expect it to be expensive if you do."

      Ed Warren, a senior manager at computer maker HardenSoft, adopted another idea during a recent three-martini meeting with senior execs: ban use of the nanotech devices by employees entirely.

      "You can tell where the arterial shunt was inserted for a few days afterward; we might just start looking for that telltale bruise," he said, between lines of cocaine. "Maybe a few employees with legitimate health problems will fall through the cracks, but that's a small price to pay for me to avoid having to pay attention to what goes on in this office, or, God forbid, what's that word that starts with T? Think?"

      "Of course, management is exempt," he said with a smile, wiping the powder from his nose. "I'm off to get nano-detoxed tomorrow, but right now I have to go fire anyone who smoked a joint within the last month. I always enjoy a little bump to help me feel powerful before I do that."

  • by wo1verin3 ( 473094 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:48PM (#7662804) Homepage
    I wonder if there is enough concentration that this would set off airport metal detectors... :security guy bob: Sir, please step through the metal detector again :security guy joe: I don't understand it, he's completely naked and we've done a cavity search!
  • by pair-a-noyd ( 594371 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:51PM (#7662833)
    Man, I have to know, when will Billy Mays [atmospheric-violence.com] begin hawking the DIY at home kit?

    Nothing like sticking a dual-channel shunt into your own leg artery..

    And if Billy is selling it I *know* it's A-OK !
  • by Hoi Polloi ( 522990 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:52PM (#7662840) Journal
    "Hi, Argonne National Lab Gift Store? Do you have bioactive nanoparticles keyed to latch onto THC? I have a drug test coming up tomorrow."
    • Nice idea, but keep in mind that THC can be traced at other places in your body than just in your blood. Hair comes to mind, for instance. So for now, this technology, if it ever becomes practical, won't save you from the consequences of a drug test...
  • by Ranazar ( 176649 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @05:02PM (#7662932)
    According to http://www.rfsafe.com/research/rf_radiation/therma l_hazards/intro.htm [slashdot.org]:

    Magnetite is found in certain bacteria and in the cells of many animals, including human beings.

    Does this mean that this treatment would also pull out any bacteria in the body that contains magnetite?
  • Life Extension (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Michael Crutcher ( 631990 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @05:12PM (#7663023)
    It would seem to me that another use of this technology would be dramatic life extension. I envision scientists creating replacement cells and attaching them to the nanoparticles. Then the particles go through the blood stream attaching to damaged cells. The attachment to a damaged cell causes a replacement cell attached to the nanoparticle to be released. Then the nanoparticles and the damaged cells they are attached to are removed from the blood stream.

    I guess it's pretty sci-fi, but it seems like all the pieces need for it to work are already here or will be soon. Will remaining young at some time be much like an oil change for your car? Would you go to the doctors office and have a certain percentage of your cells replaced?

  • This is similar to a system I use at my laboratory called MACS (http://www.miltenyibiotec.com/index.php?site=home [miltenyibiotec.com]). It uses magnetic beads conjugated to antibodies to select and filter out cells. Judging by how expensive MACS is compared to complement depletion, though, this could be very expensive because of the amount of cells and toxins and blood.
  • "all that's needed to remove the particles from the body are a magnet housed in a handheld unit and a small, dual-channel shunt inserted into an arm or leg artery.'"

    Oh....so tto remove the toxins all that you need to do is get a handheld magnet unit and stab a straw into your arm or leg artery to suck all the toxins out through. This will go over real well with consumers! I'm looking to invest, whats their ticker symbol?!

  • by ramk13 ( 570633 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @05:36PM (#7663245)
    Has no one else noticed that this approach is:
    a) fairly invasive? To treat a lot of blood in a short amount of time you need a pretty good flow rate. Which means you need a big hole in a big artery. I don't like big holes in my major arteries, but that's just me. I suppose if you were fitted with some sort of interface/valve it would be fine, but if you started bleeding through that hole later you'd be in serious trouble.

    b) very specific? You have to make an antibody/couple for *every* molebule you want to catch.

    I think this is more hype than something practical, at least for the time being. It might be different in a while after they've developed it (and done lots and lots more human trials.)
  • by HarveyBirdman ( 627248 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @06:14PM (#7663559) Journal
    My mum has a permanent shunt in her arm for her thrice weekly trips to the kidney dialysis center. She doesn't even know it's there when not hooked up. We call her the Borg Queen now.

    So instead of passing the blood through an external filter, they send in little buggers to grab the bad molecules and take them out through a similar shunt.

  • by cornice ( 9801 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @08:14PM (#7664664)
    A company I worked for a while back had a product that it was testing that could remove all sort of things from the blood. It had been tested in humans a few times removing heprin in people that would have otherwise bled out. The company ditched the product after the higher-ups decided the time and cost to bring it to market was too great. The researcher who championed the technology fought bravely to keep it alive, touting its potential to remove all sorts of toxins, but the short term gains just were not there. Now the technology likely sits in a pile of boxes somewhere instead of saving and improving lives. It makes me wonder how many other stories there are just like this one.
  • by g.a.g ( 16798 ) on Tuesday December 09, 2003 @06:28AM (#7667013)
    What I'd like to see this technology used for is fat redistribution. Imagine these critters being injected at your fat repositories, latching onto a fat cell, getting into your bloodstream and depositing it either through the shunt or wherever you have the magnetic field positioned.

    Usage: inject in the hips, wear magnetic bra! Result: Big boobs, thin legs!
    Why make trillions, if I could make ... billions!?

"I'm a mean green mother from outer space" -- Audrey II, The Little Shop of Horrors

Working...