Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Graphics Software Biotech

Patients get Solar Implants in Eyes 286

Posted by CmdrTaco from the and-you-thought-lasik-was-badass dept.
Ben Sullivan writes "As reported at Science Blog, ophthalmologists have implanted Artificial Silicon Retina microchips in the eyes of five patients to treat vision loss caused by retinitis pigmentosa. The implant is a 2mm chip that contains about 5,000 microscopic solar cells that convert light into electrical impulses. Already some patients have experienced improvements such as not bumping into objects around the house, and being able to read the time on a clock."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Patients get Solar Implants in Eyes More

Patients get Solar Implants in Eyes

Comments Filter:

  • Quality (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sanosuke001 ( 640243 ) on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:16AM (#11605872)
    How do the doctors know what kinds of electrical signals the brain needs in order to see what they;re supposed to see?

    Also, if they do figure out how to make this like our vision, don't solar cells "see" in higher wavelengths than our eyes do? Wouldn't people not see blue and purple but instead get UV and the like?

    • Re:Quality (Score:5, Interesting)

      by roman_mir ( 125474 ) on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:26AM (#11605962) Homepage Journal
      They don't have to know anything like that. All they need to do is to provide voltage that is within parameters of the cell resistance (just enough but not to burn the cells.) The brain takes care of mapping electrical signals to the visual part of cortex. I suppose this will only produce shadows of gray and not color. To produce color they will have to do more than a single electrical signal, but for shadows of one color (gray?) voltage difference will be enough.

      I wonder what is the life of the solar cells? Will they have to be replaced time to time?

      • Re:Quality (Score:3, Informative)

        by Suidae ( 162977 )
        Discover magazine had an article about the first successful experimental implant of this type a couple years ago. The sensor was a narrow strip, tall and skinny. It provided the user with a dim, low-resolution strip of vision from one eye. This was enough to allow the user to much more effectively navigate with a cane.

      • Re:Quality (Score:3, Insightful)

        by roman_mir ( 125474 )
        I think to produce color, there will be a need to setup color filters (just like color pixels you have on your computer monitor,) and do something with outputs from different color filters, maybe use different electrical frequencies for different colors or apply different voltages to cells that are very close to simulate color additions. The filters will only let specific light frequencies through, and will produce different voltage depending on the intensity of its own wavelength, so maybe multiples of th
      • As I understand it, the device will trigger both rods and cones in the retina in the retina by random, if they are only close enough to the individual micro-solar cell.
        The result might be that you get some sort of "colorful greyscale map", with local RGB noise but overall recognizable shapes. Still, beats seeing nothing.

    • The brain learns (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:48AM (#11606130)

      When surgeons re-attach a severed limb they don't worry about getting all the neurons connected correctly. They connect them randomly, and the brain learns the new mapping.

      Physically therapy takes care of the learning, but it is a side effect, the brain is good at learning new mappings. The body generally has many more problems making everything work, in ways that are not related to incorrectly attached neurons.

      • Re:The brain learns (Score:4, Interesting)

        by FirienFirien ( 857374 ) on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @12:50PM (#11607280) Homepage
        In case anyone isn't sure whether the eyes are too complex for the brain to learn, remember that they did experiments with putting inverting glasses on people, so they saw everything upside down.

        I think it took about half a week for people's brains to respond 'correctly' to a given situation (e.g. not bumping into things).

        When the goggles were removed, the test subjects saw things upside down. The brain had adjusted sufficiently to seeing upside down that reverting to the standard way up confused it.

        There was a comment from one of the users that he did occasionally still get confused, which implies that the wiring in these photodetectors may occasionally confuse the user slightly as the brain tries to remember which signal protocol it's using, but the main point is the speed of learning seen in the experiment.
    • > but instead get UV and the like?

      If so, then sign us up. You will be assimilated.
    • There has been a lot of study, both in humans and lower animals, to find out what nerve impulses are created by visual stimulation.

    • Re:Quality (Score:3, Informative)

      by Mysticalfruit ( 533341 )
      This is basically the the cochlear implant for the eye.

      The brain is dynamic enough to remap the signals into something coherent.

    • Re:Quality (Score:3, Funny)

      by bcmm ( 768152 )
      They read the RFCs for the human nervous sytem's protocols, of course!

      • Re:Quality (Score:3, Funny)

        by tim1724 ( 28482 ) *
        They read the RFCs for the human nervous sytem's protocols, of course!

        Yeah, and then find out the hard way that 90% of humans don't implement the protocols according to the spec.

  • Article Text (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:16AM (#11605876)
    Ophthalmologists at Rush University Medical Center implanted Artificial Silicon Retina (ASR) microchips in the eyes of five patients to treat vision loss caused by retinitis pigmentosa (RP). The implant is a silicon microchip 2mm in diameter and one-thousandth of an inch thick, less than the thickness of a human hair. Four patients had surgery Tuesday, January 25. The fifth patient is scheduled for a later date.

    Rush principal investigator Dr. John Pollack performed the surgeries with Dr. Kirk Packo, Dr. Pauline Merrill, Dr. Mathew MacCumber, and Dr. Jack Cohen. All are members of Illinois Retina Associates, S.C., a private practice group and are on the Rush faculty. Patients leave the hospital the same day and will be followed for two years as part of the study, and then indefinitely.

    The patients were recruited from a pool of about 5,000 applicants.

    The implants are designed for people with retinal diseases such as macular degeneration and retinitis pigmentosa, which cause blindness and vision impairment in about 10 million Americans. More than one million of these people are legally blind.

    "As is commonly seen in with retinitis pigmentosa, these patients all have severe narrowing of their visual fields down to a very small central circle, and all patients in the study are legally blind," says Pollack.

    The Artificial Silicon RetinaTM (ASR) was invented by Dr. Alan Chow, pediatric ophthalmologist and Rush faculty member, who developed the chip and founded Optobionics, with his brother Vincent, vice president of engineering. Optobionics is located in Naperville, Illinois.

    "This is an expansion of the study of the first 10 patients completed in 2002," says study investigator Dr. Kirk Packo, who oversees the three participating sites. The sites are Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Emory University School of Medicine/Atlanta VA Medical Center and Rush.

    Pollack says the current protocol has been modified to reduce the likelihood of inadvertant scientific bias. "We operated on the right eye of each of the initial 10 patients. For the next 20 patients we will randomly select which eye will receive the ASR chip. In addition, post-operative vision testers will be masked as to which eye received the ASR chip implant. The current study is being performed at these study centers in order to independently validate previous studies performed by Optobionics."

    The first 10 patients all reported some degree of improvement in visual function, says Pollack. "Improvement in visual function was variable and included the ability to read letters, improvement in color vision, and expansion of their visual field. Some patients gained new ability to recognize facial features -- something that they were unable to do before ASR chip implantation. Some patients have experienced improvement in activities of daily living such as improved ambulation-not bumping into objects around the house, and reading the time on a clock."

    Still in Phase II clinical trials, Pollack cautions it is still too early to determine what percentage of patients might experience improvement in vision and what resolution capability these patients might eventually have. "Although we hope that all patients receiving the chip will experience some improvement in visual function, we can't say for sure how these patients will respond to this new treatment since this is still an experimental trial. If this study and future studies show safety and efficacy of the chip and it's approved by the FDA, it could be as soon as three to five years that this technology would be available to others."

    Surgical Information
    The ASR chip contains approximately 5,000 microscopic solar cells that convert light into electrical impulses. The purpose of the chip is to replace damaged photoreceptors, the "light-sensing" cells of the eye, which normally convert light into electrical signals within the retina. Loss of photoreceptor cells occurs in persons with retinitis pigmentosa (RP) and other retinal diseases.

  • Orson Scott Card (Score:5, Interesting)

    by 1010011010 ( 53039 ) on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:16AM (#11605882) Homepage
    Sounds like we're on the road to the artificial eye one of OSC's characters had in the Ender's Game series. One of its cool features was that you could pull pictures and video off of it, as well as see through it. It was an in-skull camera.
    • yeah... this is just trying to replicate how the human eye cells work. To get to OSC's device you'd still need an I/O interface, which you'll note is conspicuously lacking. (and as i recall Ohaldo's left eye was the i/o socket or some such? it's been a while since i read the books)

    • Re:Orson Scott Card (Score:3, Informative)

      by jd142 ( 129673 )
      Heh, G'Kar was able to remove his eyeball and use it as a spy cam to watch what others were doing.

    • MPAA owns your eyes (Score:5, Interesting)

      by tepples ( 727027 ) <tepples@gm[ ].com ['ail' in gap]> on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:55AM (#11606183) Homepage Journal

      One of [the] cool features [of a science-fictional eye implant that this product resembles] was that you could pull pictures and video off of it, as well as see through it. It was an in-skull camera.

      Watch people with implants be banned from entering movie theaters.

      • "Congratulations on the successful implantation of your new miraculous vision-restoring eye implants! Please note, however, that because of the DMCA Revision of 2009, you are now required to wear a heavy blindfold in any place where you are at risk of viewing copyrighted materials, such as public streets, shopping venues, movie theatres, your workplace and your home."

  • Improvements (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Harald74 ( 40901 ) on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:16AM (#11605884) Homepage Journal
    Night vision, anyone?

    • Re:Improvements (Score:4, Funny)

      by phyruxus ( 72649 ) <jumpandlink@nOSpAM.yahoo.com> on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:19AM (#11605914) Homepage Journal
      It wouldn't help me see, but I'd kind of like to have some red led's in mine, terminator style.

      That's assuming of course that I can't get frikken lasers (I have a feeling an in-eye laser wouldn't be so great on the cornea)

    • Soon, we will all be able to switch between vision types like the Predator. Love it mate, love it!

      • Re:Improvements (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Haydn Fenton ( 752330 )
        Well maybe not "we" as a whole, but "we" as in one of the human race, already can.. There is a Russian girl whom posses some kind of x-ray type vision [newmediaexplorer.org]. She claims she can swap between normal vision, or the x-ray type vision at will.
        Yes, you don't have to believe it if you don't want, for all those sceptics, I'll agree it seems a pretty outrageous claim, but despite efforts of scientists, they have been unable to disprove her claims. She has successfully seen into people's bodies and correct one claim that a

        • Re:Improvements (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Mafiew ( 620133 )
          Well considering that the website refers to an article in Russia's Pravda, which has stories called "Boriska-boy from Mars" , "Humans Learn to Fly" , "Soviet Army Fought UFOs" etc. I wouldn't lend too much credence to this.

          Or who knows maybe years of exposure to radiation from atomic bomb testing has given Russians superpowers.

        • Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)

          by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:54AM (#11606171)
          Comment removed based on user account deletion
          • It was 7 patients and she correctly diagnosed 4 of them. Each patient had a different condition and they were things like removed appendix, lower aesophagus or lung section, metal staples left in the chest after surgery, an artificial hip and a metal plate in the skull while the 7th had nothing wrong.

            It was also hardly a fair test - she had been seperated from her mother and interpreter, the CSICOP AND CSMMH testers had set the minimum match threshold higher than the standard probability of 1 in 20 in pscy

            • Re:Improvements (Score:3, Informative)

              by Poseidon88 ( 791279 )
              The required hit rate was 5 out of 7 because she was told ahead of time what to look for. She just had to match each problem with the proper patient. If the claims about her powers are true (that she can see things at a cellular level, and her diagnosis accuracy is 100%), then she should have had no problem with this.

              But, instead, she mis-diagnosed some of the more obvious problems, including the patient who had a missing section of skull covered by a metal plate. The fact that she got 4 out of 7 right

        • How is it that things like this get modded to 4?
    • Cool, just like Night Man! ... O, I mean ... not so cool ... I mean ...I've never seen the show ... just commercials ....
  • Riddick, you're days are numbered!
    Soon, I too will have night-vision.
    Bwahahahaha...

    Any word yet on those muscular implants?

  • Silicon implants make the world a better place. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:17AM (#11605896)
    Especially when installed in pairs.

  • Stevie Wonder... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by cswiii ( 11061 ) on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:18AM (#11605904)
    Isn't this what Stevie Wonder has, w/r/t the pigmentosa? Furthermore, I seem to remember them talking about the possibility a couple of years ago that he would be a candidate for something similar, with a microchip.

    I'd imagine that his condition has degenerated far too much along to be aided by this, but if I recall correctly, they nonetheless said he might be a candidate for something similar. I don't think they ended up using him, however.
    • This guy in my biology class said that if Ferris dies, he's giving his eyes to Stevie Wonder.

  • in time.. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by hielenlikker ( 845669 ) on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:19AM (#11605908) Homepage
    i wonder what will be first: - a human of whom all parts are subsituted by technology - a robot which will have a real human soul
    • Depends on how you look at it. I think that when we achieve one, we will also have achieved the other.

      So my answer is...yes

    • Well, my bet's on the robot with a soul [guardian.co.uk].
      But what's the (end result) difference between a human whose parts are substituted by technology and a robot that thinks and acts like a human (I'm assuming that's what you mean by soul)? Surely they're exactly the same thing.

  • Bionics (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ArsonSmith ( 13997 ) on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:19AM (#11605912) Journal
    When will we get the ability to enhance current senses and strength. This kind of tech is always the most fun.
    • I think brain implants that enhance empathy, social awareness, and self-control would be of far more use to us all.
    • Never is my guess. This kind of thing may be used for medical purposes, and only to rectify the problem, but I don't think we'll see (well not in our lifetimes anyway) it being used on people who are fine to begin with, no matter how rich they are.

      I think the governments wouldn't dare let it happen, could you imagine what it would be like if people get the ability to see at night and through walls, can punch through bank vaults or jump over 10 foot fences, etc. Far too much risk. Heck, just look at some of
    • In theory, solar cells sensitive to infrared light could be used to give you night vision. You'd have to come up with a way to space them out so that they wouldn't interfere with normal vision, though. OLED contact lenses with PV cells on the outside might be better.
      • or how about switchable. Perhaps some type of radio switch that tells them to switch on or off depending on if you want normal light, infravision, ultraviolot vision etc...

  • I want the implant that converts... (Score:3, Funny)

    by quokkapox ( 847798 ) <quokkapox@gmail.com> on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:21AM (#11605924)
    TCP/IP into neurostimulation. Preferably allowing two-way communication. Then I can finally assimilate Google.

  • not exactly "solar" (Score:5, Insightful)

    by xtermin8 ( 719661 ) on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:21AM (#11605925)
    I guess it sounds more exciting to call them "solar cells," but obviously they're light sensors. If they were originally developed for use in solar electricity production, that should be in article, not the headline. "Matters for Nerds. Stuff that News!"
    • solar cells are more or less like light sensors apart from the sense that solar cells don't need power to operate while light sensors does (for amplification).

      Correct me if I am wrong
    • They must be photovoltaic cells, which convert light into electricity, and thus need no power supply. Imagine an inter-retinal power supply meltdown!
      • Imagine an inter-retinal power supply meltdown!

        I came here to correct the use of 'solar' but that's been done so I'll settle with you. :-P

        Inter means between two. Intra-retinal is what you were looking for. Intra-ocular might even be better.

        There. I'm feeling better already. :)

  • Solar? Implants... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by L3on ( 610722 ) on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:22AM (#11605930) Journal
    The article really doesn't explain why the chips are reffered to as "solar" cell implants. Are these people only going to be able to see light from the sun (I doubt it). I guess they just lacked a better word for the cells, any other suggestions as to why this is?

  • Incrediably important (Score:5, Interesting)

    by UlfGabe ( 846629 ) on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:23AM (#11605939) Journal
    This development is very very^H^H^H^H^H important. I have been reading the material on this stuff and it looks as if it is possible to give people devoid of sight, some sight back.

    THE REAL treasure here is knowing the brain can adapt. Think about it, they were deprived of sight, and then their brain was able to REORGANIZE itself to understand totally FOREIGN signals and use them as input.

    It demonstrates how our wetware is more adaptable than any hardware.

    • THE REAL treasure here is knowing the brain can adapt. Think about it, they were deprived of sight, and then their brain was able to REORGANIZE itself to understand totally FOREIGN signals and use them as input.

      Haven't we known that for a while? That's why surgical scars feel weird for a bit, then settle down - the nerve pattern got messed up.

    • There was an article on Fark the other day (sorry, can't find the link...someone help me out) about a blind artist who could draw objects that were described to him. When told to draw from a different perspective, he could imagine it and do it.

      When hooked up to sensors it was realized that the same parts of his brain were stimulated that us sighted folks use to remember things we have seen. So, I imagine that the signals are not FOREIGN to the brain and there isn't much REORGANIZing going on. The "circuitr

    • What's also amazing is that the eye can take this kind of punishment and heal up. It's structurally very delicate and complicated, and you'd think it would be one of those body parts that, like the brain, isn't very good at regenerating from damage.

      But no, suck out the juice, pump it full of saline, inject some air, detatch the retina, etc etc...

      wow

    • Re:Incrediably important (Score:4, Funny)

      by PMuse ( 320639 ) on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @11:24AM (#11606393)
      THE REAL treasure here is knowing the brain can adapt. ... It demonstrates how our wetware is more adaptable than any hardware.

      Yeah, just wait until we're able to reflash the firmware directly.
    • It demonstrates how our wetware is more adaptable than any hardware.

      pshh, my old 386 was much more adaptable to replace that missing basement step than my brother's head ever was.
    • hink about it, they were deprived of sight, and then their brain was able to REORGANIZE itself to understand totally FOREIGN signals and use them as input.

      Umm, if I'm reading the article right, this technology is being used to treat people with degenerative disorders. IOW, these are diseases which progress *after* birth, and as such, the patients had vision, then lost it. So, these signals are far from "foreign", in that their visual cortex is trained to respond to simulae from the retina. Although, it

  • Resolution (Score:4, Insightful)

    by tsa ( 15680 ) on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:27AM (#11605964) Homepage
    The ASR chip contains approximately 5,000 microscopic solar cells that convert light into electrical impulses.

    5000 cells, that's an area of 70x70 cells. Is that enough to see with or am I missing something?

    • Re:Resolution (Score:3, Insightful)

      by wulfhound ( 614369 )
      70x70 is enough vision to be useful - more than enough to see doorways, furniture and suchlike, and not far off what you'd need to read large print (street signs and suchlike).

      • Re:Resolution (Score:3, Informative)

        by TomorrowPlusX ( 571956 )
        Also, keep in mind that our natural eyes are actually pretty shitty cameras ( at least, from the standpoint of what we expect from a CCD ). It turns out our brains are interpolating an awful lot from the spotty signals coming in from our eyes.

        • Coaxial cameras (Score:3, Informative)

          by rarose ( 36450 )
          I've always thought that the best analogy for our eyes are two coaxial cameras. A very narrow beam, high resolution camera slightly off the centerline, surrounded by a wide-angle low resolution camera.

          Rods, which predominate the wide-angle camera system, are like hyped B&W film... great night sensitivity, but grainy. Cones, which dominate the inner narrow-angle camera system give color vision, but require much higher light levels to operate.
    • It is a beginning. You are right, it isn't the greatest resolution, but even the article text refers to the minimal improvement (not bumping into things).

      No, these folks won't be driving cars (I hope), but if this article is true, we should see improvements over the years. I wouldnn't doubt if by the ened of this century, we see the option to upgrade eyes ar beyond what we have today.
    • We'd also need to know the size of the chip to figure out the angular resolution which is far more important than the raw 70x70 size.

      70x70 that had a large angular span would be very very useful for navigating the world, even if it wouldn't help them read the fine print on the bottom of an auto loan.

      70x70 that had a very small angular span would help them read the auto loan but would be absolutely useless for walking out of the house towards the car. Think about it... a blind person's white cane is an ext
  • some patients have experienced improvements such as not bumping into objects around the house, and being able to read the time on a clock.

    I say these should be mandatory for /. editors. Maybe it will help them spot duplicate stories better.

    *ducks*

  • Great News, Little to do With Solar (Score:4, Insightful)

    by changos ( 105425 ) on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @10:43AM (#11606087) Homepage Journal
    This is great news. I've been following these procedures for quite some time. Retinitis Pigmentosa runs in our family.

    One thing to point out is that this disease is a degeneration of the retina. It's called pigmentosa due to the fact that as the retinal cells die, small spots appear on the retina. The degenerations starts on the outside, and moves inward, creating a tunnel-like feeling for the patient.

    My uncle had surgery in Cuba (We live in Guatemala, so let's just skip the whole Cuba-American posts) where they operated his retina, and treated it with oxygen and Ozone therapies. This type of operation is not intended to cure it, but to stop it. This was about 5 years ago, and his retinitis pigmentosa has not spread, but it's still a bit early to know for sure.

    If you have more questions there is tons of information on the web

    --------------------
    Arturo Mijangos
  • ...that make me wish I studied life science instead of computer engineering. I'd love to say I contributed to a great advancement like this, and the biomedical field really interests me. In computer architecture if I were to say "I invented a new branch predictor that's 100% accurate and only consumes 20% of the normal die area", about 19/20 people wouldn't know what the hell I was talking about. Are we forever to be unsung heroes? >_>
    • I'm one of the 19 ;-) but I know that advancements in computing and algorithms are useful to the world at large. Imagine if this biomedical team had not had computers to design their implant?

      Do what you can. Do it well. Don't worry that you can't do everything. Don't worry about being unsung, so long as you know you did what you could.

      Justin.
      PS Oh, and slander Microsoft/SCO every chance you get.
    • "about 19/20 people "
      I think that is highly optimistic. My guess would be closer to 1 out 1000 people. Most people in most fields are forever to be unsung heroes. Sure the doctor that implanted was important but what about the scientist that developed the method of making the sensor? Or the guy that wrote the OS that the designer of the sensor used. Or the person that wrote the cad program. It all adds up.
      Now if you did invent a new branch predictor that was 100% accurate and only consumed 20% of the normal
  • Finally hope for serial masturbators everywhere.
  • Richard Priar "I'm black?"

    Husband to wife: "Hey you said you were a 5'9" super model"

  • Subretinal Non-Powered Approach Has Limits (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pz ( 113803 ) on Tuesday February 08, 2005 @11:38AM (#11606517) Journal
    IAAVN (I Am A Visual Neuroscientist) working on artificial vision. I have seen presentations on this approach, and unlike many of the other efforts in this field, Dr. Chow's claims appear astonishingly good.

    The basic idea is beautiful and elegant: you put an array of tiny photodiodes behind the retina, exactly where the photoreceptor cells (rods and cones) are. Shining light on each of these nearly-cell-sized photodiodes creates a localized voltage which should stimulate a small handful of cells, generating a signal that will mimic the original biologically transduced input to the retina. The photodiodes nicely supplant the dying photosensitive cells. It sounds perfect.

    I was very impressed with their presentation at a one-day symposium on artificial vision I attended at USC a few years ago, until one of the audience members pointed out that they had done some calculations, and it seemed that one would need incredibly high light levels to generate enough current to stimulate the local cells. Dr. Chow admitted that, even being optimistic about the conversion efficiency of photodiodes (which here need to be optimized for biocompatibility more than efficiency), the physics involved dictates that you would need light bright enough to cause damage to even the non-photosensitive tissue to get the device to work. Dr. Chow then backpedaled to say that even if the device cannot restore lost vision, it can perhaps supplant any remaining healty cells to improve vision in low-sighted patients. That question-anwer cycle was the first point in his presentation where he backed off from the claim of restoring full vision to blind patients.

    Dr. Chow's results were done in a private laboratory, part of a company set up to profit from his advances. He must answer to his shareholders, and his results are not open to the level of scruitiny that standard scientific claims are. He was reluctant to answer questions at this session. Therefore, as a scientist I am bound by the lack of openness to view his claims with a grain of salt.

    Other efforts to create artificial vision are still having trouble with just a handful of points of light. While I believe that the subretinal approach has a good chance of eventually proving fruitful, using a silicon-based device that lacks an external power source just cannot produce normal vision. This is why the article concentrates on the improvements in existing low vision, rather than discussing restoration of lost vision.
    • I'd be curious if the sensitivity of the surrounding neurons would increase to better sense the impulses generated by the implant. It seems that this would just be a small modification of the neural net...

      As such it would seem logical to extrapolate that this approach would be far better with patients who still have low vision rather than no vision because their neural nets already have "the right wiring" so there's only one biological know (the sensitivity) that needs to be tweaked.

Slashdot Top Deals

"When the going gets tough, the tough get empirical." -- Jon Carroll

Close