Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Kidney Printer

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the hella-spendy-ink-cartridges dept.

Biotech 147

smitty777 writes "Dr. Anthony Atala of the Wake Forest Institute of Regenerative Medicine demonstrated his technique for printing a new kidney. The early stage technology involves scanning the patient's current organ, and actually printing the organ directly into the patient. He refutes reported claims that it's just a kidney shaped mold, as reported by some. While still in the early stages, it does hold promise that we will be able to use this technology for actual transplants in the future."

cancel ×

147 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Awesome (5, Funny)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 3 years ago | (#35420826)

HP's ink cartridges cost a kidney, new printer can actually print kidneys.

The circle of life is complete.

Re:Awesome (2)

gilleain (1310105) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421056)

HP's ink cartridges cost a kidney, new printer can actually print kidneys.

The circle of life is complete.

Sadly, 90% through printing of the new kidney, the "replace cartridge" light will start blinking - the house always wins...

Re:Awesome (1)

GameMaster (148118) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421174)

I'd hate to be the first person to use a new machine, I hear that the cartridge that comes with the machine only makes it to about 50%.

Re:Awesome (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421574)

Take it out and shake it.

Re:Awesome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35422146)

If it only makes it to 50% of ideal (two complete, 100% functional kidneys), that's still one complete, 100% functional kidney. Which is more than enough to sustain normal life.

Re:Awesome (1)

The Grim Reefer2 (1195989) | more than 3 years ago | (#35423958)

HP's ink cartridges cost a kidney, new printer can actually print kidneys.

The circle of life is complete.

Sadly, 90% through printing of the new kidney, the "replace cartridge" light will start blinking - the house always wins...

That's OK. You have enough ink to print 5 more full kidneys before you really run out of ink.

New From Apple: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35421872)

The iLiver.

Yeah but how much is the ink cartridge? (1)

vawwyakr (1992390) | more than 3 years ago | (#35420840)

That's where they get you! $30 for a printhead with some "genuine HP kidney cells" inside.

Re:Yeah but how much is the ink cartridge? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35420866)

Would you rather printheads were still separate from ink cartridges and that every time it got clogged you had to get a new printer or send it in for service?

Re:Yeah but how much is the ink cartridge? (1)

dgatwood (11270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35420998)

In my experience, print heads clog more often than I run out of ink. Therefore, neither of those methods is good. The right solution is to make printers that flush out their own heads with an appropriate solvent (e.g. an isopropanol tank) every time you shut them down so that the heads don't get dried ink inside them in the first place. Moving the print head to the ink tank is just shifting the problem around.

Back on topic, can you imagine this sort of printer getting clogged? Whoops. We accidentally put a few of somebody else's kidney cells inside your kidney along with your own. That's gonna be a tumor in a few years, but for now, enjoy your life while it lasts.

Re:Yeah but how much is the ink cartridge? (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421386)

No the correct solution is to not use ink but instead a toner based technology. Inkjets are pure garbage.

Re:Yeah but how much is the ink cartridge? (1)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421732)

Yep, inkjets were are cheap stopgap that should have only been used long enough for laser printers to come down in price. That time has come and passed. There is no longer a good reason for inkjets to exist in the consumer market.

Re:Yeah but how much is the ink cartridge? (1)

ShooterNeo (555040) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421826)

Extremely high resolution photos can still be printed with inkjets.

Of course, if you want glossy photos, you might as well just print them online to a printer at your local walgreens, walmart, or other store. The quality will be better and the cost cheaper unless you are printing a huge number...no wait, still cheaper.

Never mind, then.

Re:Yeah but how much is the ink cartridge? (1)

omnichad (1198475) | more than 3 years ago | (#35423164)

Show me a glossy CD/DVD label I can print with a laser. That's why I have inkjet. The matte labels are too thick and add too much weight unbalance to the disc.

Re:Yeah but how much is the ink cartridge? (1)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422724)

Inkjets are good for printing on transparent film and non-bendable objects.

Re:Yeah but how much is the ink cartridge? (1)

dgatwood (11270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35423502)

That's a good idea. Only problem is that decent wide format color laser printers start in the neighborhood of two grand. You can burn through an awful lot of print heads before laser pays for itself unless you are content with 8.5x11 or smaller.

Re:Yeah but how much is the ink cartridge? (1)

Kosi (589267) | more than 3 years ago | (#35423292)

No, I'll stick to Canon inkjet printers. Separate printhead and cartridges, in the "better" models even separate tanks for the colors.

And how long (5, Funny)

Anubis350 (772791) | more than 3 years ago | (#35420858)

before we can print a new Milla Jovovich?

Re:And how long (3, Funny)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | more than 3 years ago | (#35420886)

The day before the end of civilization since no one will ever leave the house after that. Multipass!

Re:And how long (2)

iluvcapra (782887) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421242)

Only if the printer can produce enough pot to keep your Clone-ovich in the house.

Re:And how long (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35422398)

Pot? My Clone-ovich smokes cock. 24x7. Isn't that the point?

Re:And how long (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35420902)

Just be sure to get some pictures.... for the archives.

The term printer jam (2)

systematical (1394991) | more than 3 years ago | (#35420930)

just took on a whole new meaning.

It's this kinda shit... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35420952)

I just caught up and bought a 3d printer, and now they come out with a kidney printer... it's a never ending cycle.

Re:It's this kinda shit... (2)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 3 years ago | (#35423116)

He would have gotten the technology a lot sooner but he didn't get much response to his add for the trial : "Scientist wants to scan your organ. Call Dr A. Atala Now. $$$ offered"

What? (1)

immortalpob (847008) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421000)

TFS: "He refutes reported claims that it's just a kidney shaped mold, as reported by some"

TFA: "Wake Forest has since clarified media inaccuracies in a press release, stating Dr. Atla printed "a kidney-shaped mold", not a functioning kidney."

Re:What? (5, Informative)

immortalpob (847008) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421060)

Actually that sentence is terrible.. from the wake forest site: "Reports in the media that Dr. Anthony Atala printed a real kidney at the TED conference in Long Beach, Calif., are completely inaccurate. At the conference, Dr. Atala used a new type of technology to print a kidney-shaped mold and explained how one day – many years from now – the technology might be used to print actual organs."

So no real kidney, just a mold.

Re:What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35421190)

Wait... so then the pob was right to be confused, because the summary is wrong? But yes, it is a very poorly worded sentence, given it has two possible interpretations directly opposing each other.

Re:What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35421480)

Someone needs to clarify for them what "refute" means.

Re:What? (2)

ciaohound (118419) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422012)

"Just" a mold? I suppose penicillin is "just" a mold. You insensitive clod.

Re:What? (2)

davef1999 (904391) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422780)

I talked w/Dr. Atala at TED. He has printed real kidney fragments, implanted them in cows, and they've produced urine. The current limiting factor is nourishment for the kidney cells during the printing process. Thus, the 'total print time' is limited, which means he can make only small kidneys at the moment. He says the likely first application will be 'augmentation' kidneys for sufferers of kidney disease, not full replacements. And this is still years away. The device on stage at TED was his actual kidney printer, but I have no idea what it was loaded with during his talk. Perhaps some low-cost filler material rather than carefully (and expensively) prepared kidney cells or stem cells or whatever it is he prints up in the lab.

Re:What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35421068)

The second quote is ambigiously written. What it's trying to say is that the original press release that said it was a kidney-shaped mold, but Wake Forest has clarified this was inaccurate, and it's a functioning kidney. That is, when it says 'stating Dr. Atla printed "a kidney-shaped mold", not a functioning kidney.', this is what the inaccurate press release stated. What they clarified is that this was inaccurate.

Re:What? (1)

immortalpob (847008) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421532)

Actually I posted a clarification to my post noting the ambiguity there and going straight to the press release. The summary is wrong, he refuted the incorrect press releases which stated that he had created a functioning kidney. Is that unclear enough...

Re:What? (1)

gknoy (899301) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421796)

Does anyone else find this chain of comments strangely reminiscent of the Monty Python and the Holy Grail credit subtitles?

As reported by his employer (1)

curio_city (1972556) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421006)

From TFA:

Wake Forest has since clarified media inaccuracies in a press release, stating Dr. Atla printed "a kidney-shaped mold", not a functioning kidney.

Where's the link for Dr. Atala contradicting Wake Forest?

Grandiose summary (1)

curio_city (1972556) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421080)

What Wake Forest says. [wfubmc.edu]

The "kidneys" produced could not be printed into the patient, they're not functional.

How much does it cost? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35421010)

I hear it costs an arm and a leg!

Bad Summary (1)

Henneshoe (987210) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421012)

The Summary confuses me...
From the summary:

He refutes reported claims that it's just a kidney shaped mold, as reported by some.

From the linked story:

Wake Forest has since clarified media inaccuracies in a press release, stating Dr. Atla printed "a kidney-shaped mold", not a functioning kidney.

Did he print an actual kidney or not. I am guessing not.

Re:Bad Summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35421504)

No.

Original submission got it backwards.

See press release from University:
http://www.wfubmc.edu/Research/WFIRM/Media-Reports-on-Kidney-Printing-Inaccurate.htm

Re:Bad Summary (1)

immortalpob (847008) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421576)

No he did not, The summary is wrong. Wake forest actually clarified he had NOT produce a working kidney.

Kidney shortage (0, Troll)

brian0918 (638904) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421058)

In the TED talk, he blames things like "we're living longer" for the shortage of organs. The much more obvious reason why there is a shortage of organs, and why organs are so expensive, is that it is illegal to sell one's own organs. An elderly person has no incentive to donate his organs on death, if his surviving loved ones do not profit from it.

This shortage is contrived.

Re:Kidney shortage (0)

elsurexiste (1758620) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421642)

You have strayed far from your pure-capitalism bridge, troll. Please, do continue.

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

jameskojiro (705701) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421920)

Do you own your own body? I would imagine you would like to believe that you do. If you think that a woman owns her own body and can do what she would like with it ie. Abortion, then she and any one else with sentience would thereby have the rights to their own body to do with it as they please. This includes selling parts off of it and transferring their property after their deaths, it. posthumous selling of their own internal organs. It isn't a capitalism issue, it is a body ownership issue.

Do you own your own body? Or do you think the "state" is somehow "entitled" to own your own body.

If you think the state owns your body, have fun with that philosophy as the state can now do whatever they want with you.

Re:Kidney shortage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35422026)

How simplistic. I don't think I own my own body. I also don't think the state owns my body. I don't think my body is a valid target for the ownership relationship. Not everything that exists can be owned.

Also, entertaining for a moment your concept of body ownership, I don't think ownership is a binary proposition, wherein someone either has complete control to do whatever they wish with the object or has no control to do anything they wish with the object.

Re:Kidney shortage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35422110)

Is a man not entitled to his own organs pulsating within his own body?

No! Said the Anonymous Coward, It belongs to no one.

No! Said the man in the Government, It belongs to the people on the organ donor list.

No! Said the Chinese Government, It belongs to the State.

I am Andrew Ryan and I........

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

vell0cet (1055494) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422138)

Not really. This is a matter of law. You can own your own body and still not do things with it that are illegal.

Personally, I think that this is a good idea. People can be pressured into all sorts of things. Selling parts of your body should not be one of those.

Re:Kidney shortage (0)

BlackSnake112 (912158) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422524)

Well, if you believe that people own their own bodies. The fetus is only half owned by the woman. The other 'owner' is who ever the father is. One would need to get his permission for the abortion. Unless we have cloning, in that case you are saying what you can do with yourself. Of course cloning throws a huge wrench into things.

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

JesseMcDonald (536341) | more than 3 years ago | (#35423222)

I think you're being overly generous in assigning a full half-share to the father. Compared to the mother's contribution to the process, the father's part is negligible. Some minor compensation may be in order, but certainly nothing more. Moreover, regardless of the division of ownership, no one has any right to demand that someone else use their body in a certain way; that includes continuing a pregnancy. At most you can seek compensation for a broken contract, assuming you can show that one existed in the first place.

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

thedonger (1317951) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422742)

He's probably just worried about a sub-prime organ market.

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

psithurism (1642461) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421972)

An elderly person has no incentive to donate his organs on death, if his surviving loved ones do not profit from it.

Please, do continue.

Profit for loved ones? Altruism is already the motivating factor for people who have become organ donors. The selfish aren't going to give up their organs for compensation to their heirs (who already get a hefty life insurance payout). If you want to buy organs, let people take out a reverse mortgage on their body. I suspect that would work better.

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

Isaac-1 (233099) | more than 3 years ago | (#35423130)

No one wants an 80 year old warn out liver, kidney, heart, etc. Instead they one one from the healthy 25 year old that just ran his motorcycle into the side of a bus.

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

517714 (762276) | more than 3 years ago | (#35424022)

Is this why 80 year olds ride the bus?

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

jameskojiro (705701) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421854)

Why not allow people to sell their organs to help cover the expensive costs of funerals. More old folks would love to sell their internal organs so as to help their loved ones they leave behind not being burdened by having to pay for their funeral.

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

jimmydigital (267697) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422056)

Would you want the organs of an old person? Yea.. I wouldn't either and neither does anyone else. There is no market for the organs of old people. You might be able to make a case for skin.. but even then I'm not sure. They won't even take your bone marrow if you are over 55.

Re:Kidney shortage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35422518)

With the number of commercials I see on tv about older people who have fallen down and hurt themselves and are thus models for things like walk-in bathtubs, alert beacons, osteoporosis-related drugs, and public service announcements - I get the feeling they don't really have the marrow to give.

Re:Kidney shortage (2)

hierophanta (1345511) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422760)

when the alternative is certain death, yes, I and most people will happily take the organ.

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

Isaac-1 (233099) | more than 3 years ago | (#35423162)

Yes, but at the cost of surgery and on going care is it worth it for a worn out organ that may at best have a few more years of limited use left?

Re:Kidney shortage (2)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421906)

The much more obvious reason why there is a shortage of organs, and why organs are so expensive, is that it is illegal to sell one's own organs. An elderly person has no incentive to donate his organs on death, if his surviving loved ones do not profit from it.

See, someone less out of touch with reality who doesn't think capitalism solves all problems would suggest that you should have to opt-out of organ donation rather than opt in. That would solve the problem WITHOUT encouraging organ theft, desperate people selling their organs while still alive, and all sorts of other hideous abuses.

Oh, but wait, then it would be harder for anyone to make millions in organ trading... well then never mind, it's clearly socialism and that's evil.

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

jameskojiro (705701) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421958)

Do you own your own body? I would imagine you would like to believe that you do. If you think that a woman owns her own body and can do what she would like with it ie. Abortion, then she and any one else with sentience would thereby have the rights to their own body to do with it as they please. This includes selling parts off of it and transferring their property after their deaths, it. posthumous selling of their own internal organs. It isn't a capitalism issue, it is a body ownership issue.

Do you own your own body? Or do you think the "state" is somehow "entitled" to own your own body.

If you think the state owns your body, have fun with that philosophy as the state can now do whatever they want with you.

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422014)

If you think the state owns your body, have fun with that philosophy as the state can now do whatever they want with you.

Well I think the problem here is that straw men have no organs, but if they did, ownership of said organs would be a very interesting issue. Maybe I'd even make a statement on who owns straw man organs. But I didn't, did I?

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422054)

Alternatively, the state is placing limitations on the actions that doctors are allowed to take.

No need to tell you what to do with your body when we can just tell the doctors what not to do.

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

jameskojiro (705701) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422124)

If i want to sell my internal Organs after I die, I already have the inherent right to do, it is the government who is infringing already on those rights.

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422262)

Oh, I see, the inherent rights of a corpse. Right.

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

SleazyRidr (1563649) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422314)

There are some problems that relate to the concept of ownership. This is not one of those problems.

We in the real world decided some time ago that there are many issues where a pragmatic approach, ignoring philosophical consistency, gets the job done and allows us to get on with making the world a nicer place to live.

Re:Kidney shortage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35422202)

I'm getting the feeling that this whole conversation has to do with the Law & Order that aired last night.

Now everyone is an expert on kidney transplants. "People should be able to sell their organs, but it's illegal." and "The donation process should be opt-out" are both from the first 10 minutes of the episode.

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422292)

Odd coincidence, but I didn't that episode. The actual inspiration came from a poster on the DMV wall the other day, which I saw while renewing my license.

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 3 years ago | (#35423856)

No, people would still make millions in organ trading (and installation), just not the people who grew them.

I see nothing wrong with people selling their own organs, and I seriously doubt it would diminish what is already a minuscule pool of donors.

Anyway, most people make an explicit choice when they receive their driver's license or state ID, which could just as easily be called "out-out" as "opt-in."

Organs for profit? (1)

nowen2dot (1768088) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422592)

Let's keep profits out of the organ donor process. The last thing we need are, "Need money fast? Donate a kidney! Don't worry. You have two of them!"

Re:Kidney shortage (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 3 years ago | (#35423220)

An elderly person has no incentive to donate his organs on death, if his surviving loved ones do not profit from it.

The elderly person may have nothing of value to donate.

Re:Kidney shortage (2)

paeanblack (191171) | more than 3 years ago | (#35423500)

In the TED talk, he blames things like "we're living longer" for the shortage of organs.

Improvements in trauma medicine, vehicular safety, and workplace safety are the biggest causes for the shortage of organs.

Things like seatbelt laws, motorcycle helmet laws, and OSHA aren't helping either. Catastrophic fatal injuries (especially head trauma) are jackpots for donor organs. Crass, but true.

How this works (4, Interesting)

currently_awake (1248758) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421092)

You take an inkjet printer, load the tank with (organ specialized) human cells and print the organ layer by layer with a filler material to hold it all together. The best source of human cells would be stem cells(made from that person to prevent immune system hazards), though taking cells from an existing kidney might work in some cases. It would work best done outside the body at least till the glue dries. Should work for most of the organs in the human body, including muscle and tendons. stem cell research is almost at the point this can be done, eliminating the need for donor organs. In theory this would work for bones as well, allowing you to print an arm or leg. In about 25 years we'll have the stem cell/printer tech to print a whole person with this tech (or build an android that looks/feels the same), though i'm sure that will be banned by the religious extremists. If AI ever works techno-nerds living in their parents basements will finally .

Re:How this works (1)

FesterDaFelcher (651853) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421172)

Will finally WHAT? I've got to know!?!?!

Re:How this works (1)

krnpimpsta (906084) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421226)

Will finally WHAT? I've got to know!?!?!

Sorry, this is slashdot... that's as far as we know. Maybe someone from the Outside can chime in on what happens when a man and woman get together??

Hopefully it's sweet like ninjas! (I love ninjas)

Re:How this works (1)

Urkki (668283) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422356)

Will finally WHAT? I've got to know!?!?!

Sorry, this is slashdot... that's as far as we know. Maybe someone from the Outside can chime in on what happens when a man and woman get together??

Hopefully it's sweet like ninjas! (I love ninjas)

Oh, I'm pretty sure that the hard disk of your average basement dweller has a decent selection of HD-quality video material about what happens when men and women get together in various combinations...

Beavis and Butthead (1)

tekrat (242117) | more than 3 years ago | (#35423964)

Heh, hehe heheheh heheheheheheh....
He said 'hard disk'.

Heh, hehe heheheh heheheheheheh....

Re:How this works (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421296)

Sorry, I accidentally the last sentence.

Re:How this works (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35421968)

The whole thing.

Re:How this works (1)

angelbar (1823238) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421584)

I dont mind the extremists!! 38+25 years more it's just enoug, move forward please... How can I help?

Bah - I already read this story (0)

commodore6502 (1981532) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421094)

It was published in the January 2007 F&SF (fantasy/scifi) magazine, if I recall correctly. It was about a society that "printed" bones and other organs by converting yellow dust into a hard polymer.

Unfortunately this proved to be a disruptive technology, because pretty soon people were printing all kinds of crap like Dishes, pots/pans, even whole houses/shacks. It toppled the scarcity-based economy since everything could be instantly copied for cheap. (Kinda like books, music, and video today.)

Re:Bah - I already read this story (1)

peragrin (659227) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421350)

That works up to a certian point. It will force raw material price through the roof, while manufactuing gets cut out.

In the end economics always wins

Re:Bah - I already read this story (1)

VanGarrett (1269030) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422004)

There are other mitigating factors, the biggest of which, is how many people it takes to produce an adequate supply of the material to satisfy the needs of the population as a whole. If it is adequately difficult to produce in quantity that everyone basically needs to manufacture their own, then the economy doesn't change. However, if, for the sake of contrast, an adequate supply for the world can be produced by two people in an afternoon, then we run into a different problem. The new product obsoletes an entire industry, and with it, a great chunk of the world's income. Factory workers make up a great deal of the world's population, and when their income goes away, that spreads to have an impact on the service industry, the entertainment industry and on outward, like a cancer. Before long, virtually the only people with an income to purchase the raw material, are the people who produce it.

I'm not exactly sure how it works out from there. Either we take an altruistic approach, such as in the Star Trek universe, where every man works to the betterment of world and self, or we take on a more complex economy that has a substantially different balancing point.

Inquiring minds want to know... (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421104)

How do they taste? How about with some fava beans and a nice chianti?

Human trials (1)

SirGarlon (845873) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421154)

TFA makes it sound like a printer for a much simpler organ (bladder) has been used in at least one human trial. I wonder if there is anything published in medical literature about this kind of thing? (I'm not in medicine or biotech, so I wouldn't necessarily know).

Something more immediate.... (1)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421186)

Wish this guy would test the technology using goose liver. It will save the poor birds a lot of grief, assure French restaurants a steady supply of fois gras, satisfy PETA and will get to the market sooner.

Re:Something more immediate.... (1)

shis-ka-bob (595298) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421524)

I'm waiting for a kidney transplant. I'm not sure that fois gras is a more immediate concern.

Re:Something more immediate.... (2)

Changa_MC (827317) | more than 3 years ago | (#35423466)

I had a friend on the waiting list for a kidney for many years so I certainly sympathize with your plight, but you misread the GP. Not a more immediate concern, but more immediate results. It will be years before the FDA allows you to implant a synthetic kidney, possibly decades. Before that, we need to produce a fully functional kidney, which is years to decades out as well. In the meantime, we can start producing fois gras next month, and get it approved for human consumption within a couple years (or days if we label it "herbal supplement"), money from which can go towards the synthetic kidney for transplants research. Solving tiny problems is the easiest way to eventually solve insurmountably large problems.

Re:Something more immediate.... (1)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421886)

There is no satisfying organizations like PETA. Their end goal is a paradox. Printing fois gras would just give them more time to go after other animal uses.

Re:Something more immediate.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35423338)

satisfy PETA

That means less naked celebs, not good.

The smudges can be brutal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35421196)

Let that thing dry completely before you touch it...wouldn't want it to smudge.

hello new kidney (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35421284)

http://gutenver.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/hello_kidney_design_light_blue.png

Heres the actual talk (2)

Guano_Jim (157555) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421338)

http://www.ted.com/talks/anthony_atala_printing_a_human_kidney.html

You can watch the actual video here.

Other organs? (1)

adeft (1805910) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421344)

I might be interested in a liver in 30 years--Government based IT work is enough to drive anyone to drink.

bottoms up! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35421372)

I'll drink to that! Can he get me a new liver too?

prepare yourself for a new wave of spam (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35421494)

Male enlargement printing , up to five inch more of manliness.

PC Load Liver (5, Funny)

Herg (564957) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421508)

What the f@(% does that mean?

Kidneyless? (1)

oldmac31310 (1845668) | more than 3 years ago | (#35421622)

Some time in the future, will we be striving for the kidneyless office and be content with viewing virtual kidneys on our monitors? After all, real kidneys are wasteful and harmful to the planet. Aren't they?

Damn Fineprint (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35421686)

And after you get your shiny new custom made organ you'll be enrolled in our easy payment plan....
The fine print: failure to pay will result in reposession.

How it really works (3, Interesting)

ddd0004 (1984672) | more than 3 years ago | (#35422102)

It gets the command to print a new kidney.
It reports that it will be ready it 48 hours.
It flies down to Mexico.
Some unsuspecting tourist wakes up in a bathtub of ice.
You get a new kidney.

"Enhance Your Organ" spam goes legit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35422972)

I'm going to assume kidneys won't be the only organs that will be considered for fabrication.

"Hey doc, that kidney works great! Uh, how about, you know, printing out something else I already got, only make it like a wide-body stretch version?..."

Please pass the A1! (1)

RickyG (1009867) | more than 3 years ago | (#35423170)

Why not print something you can sell to everyone? T-Bone steaks! If you think your printer cartridge cost is bad now, wait until you try to buy the kidney favored one!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>