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!

Bionic Cat Eye Implants Aid Blindness Research

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the seeing-the-light dept.

Biotech 94

docinthemachine writes with news of felines getting human retinal implants. The cats were afflicted with a version of retinitis pigmentosa, a disease that also blinds humans. The implants are 2-millimeter-wide chips surgically implanted in the back of eye. Each chip's surface is covered with 5,000 microphotodiodes that react to light, sending electric signals along the eye's optic nerve to the brain. The article makes clear that the implants don't allow the cats to see — what they get is impulses of light. The hope is that the electrical activity in the optic nerve will encourage new retinal cells to grow. The article notes: "The chips, which provide their own energy, have shown encouraging results in clinical human trials, in some cases improving sight in people with retinitis pigmentosa or at least slowing the disease's development. Narfstrom said chips have been implanted in 30 people."

cancel ×

94 comments

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

Nothing for you to see here. Please move along. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17728924)

Never so appropriate. Poor kitties. Fark humans.

Morals (4, Funny)

pete-classic (75983) | more than 7 years ago | (#17728932)

My cat refuses to use any product or treatment that has been tested on humans.

-Peter

Re:Morals (1)

Ucklak (755284) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729012)

I wonder what the PeTA crowd thinks of this 'experimentation' on cats.

Actually, who cares what they think.
In their warped logic, this should be outlawed.

Re:Morals (1)

mdm-adph (1030332) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729122)

unless someone high in their organization needs or uses it -- then, expect them to make allowances.

Re:Morals (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729608)

The people who run PETA are kinda crazy. But do you have any evidence that they're the kind of hypocrites you call them?

Re:Morals (1)

Kemanorel (127835) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729790)

The use of bovine insulin by one of their executive officers readily springs to mind.

Source: Penn & Teller's Bullsh*t episode [imdb.com] on PETA

Re:Morals (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17730430)

What's hypocritical about that? If the only way I could live was to kill a cow, I'll kill the cow. Still, I don't eat meat because I don't have to eat meat to live.

Re:Morals (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 7 years ago | (#17730694)

The use of bovine insulin by one of their executive officers readily springs to mind.

Source: Penn & Teller's Bullsh*t episode [imdb.com] on PETA


I watched one of those _Bullshit_ episodes once, because I was a fan of Penn & Teller in the 1980s, when they were funny and punks (in the late 1990s I had the dubious honor to easily heckle them performing in a backroom at an NYC computer convention, showing how low they'll go). It was loaded with badly sourced, self-serving, cherry picked bullshit: "rebunking" some conventional wisdom.

So I wasn't surprised when it took me only a minute to google up [google.com] plenty of debunks to their claims that PETA's exec exploits animals unethically. Namely, the fact that insulin hasn't been derived from bovine sources [technocrat.net] for a long time, and the animal testing of insulin was only in 1921.

Besides, yeast isn't animals, so AFAIK PETA has nothing against exploiting it. And I don't think that even exploiting animals to make insulin or other lifesaving drugs is necessarily unethical. Hell, I don't think that raising animals for fur is unethical, as long as they're not tortured while they're alive. But without an actual citation of Penn & Teller's actual source on their questionable accusation, it's hard to find whether their accusation is warranted.

FWIW, Penn & Teller pose as "skeptics" on their show, when they're just doubters. Real skeptics would check Penn & Teller's _Bullshit_ sources, as I just did, before citing them publicly. And realize that outrageous claims require extraordinary evidence.

Re:Morals (1)

OfficeSubmarine (1031930) | more than 7 years ago | (#17733892)

Penn's always been pretty open that bullshit is closer to "porn for skeptics" than anything someone should use as a citation. I'd really hope that anyone would take a tv show, no matter who's doing it, with far more gains of salt than even wikipedia.

Re:Morals (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 7 years ago | (#17736754)

Penn is a punk, like Sid Vicious. Or like Pete Townshend: he's got talent, and uses it to pose as a "magician", "skeptic", or whatever form he's jumping into. Once in the suit, he uses it to attack the instruments and performances of the pros. He's fun, but he's a poser, most dangerous to anyone who takes him too seriously.

Re:Morals (2, Funny)

Lord_Slepnir (585350) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729144)

I have a perfectly balanced compromise:

We test this out on PeTA members.

I'll go get the corkscrews, you get the doctors to put these in.

Re:Morals (1)

mcostas (973159) | more than 7 years ago | (#17733770)

You've got it backwards. It's the researchers that are making the assertion that the experimental results are so valuable that they justify harming unwilling individuals. So logically, the researchers should volunteer their children for the experiments. PETA's position would probably be that using cats isn't a necessity. Regardless of how the cat experiment goes, human experiments that follow will still be necessary and not particularly safer.

Re:Morals (1)

CapitalT (987101) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729820)

I wonder what the PeTA crowd thinks of this 'experimentation' on cats.


PeTA? "People for eating Tasty Animals"?

Re:Morals (1)

topham (32406) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729886)

If PETA doesn't like it they can volunteer themselves, or their kids for future experiments.

Re:Morals (1)

mcostas (973159) | more than 7 years ago | (#17733386)

I believe it's a far more "warped logic" that would have you believe that it's morally acceptable to sacrifice an unwilling individual for the benefit of others (or even the slim potential of marginal benefit, as most animal research produces no tangible benefits) as long as the name of the species is not homo sapiens. Science provides no reason to draw such a magical distinction between humans and other species. Only religious mythology makes such a distinction. If you accept a general utilitarian position that it's ok to trade one man to save ten men, then certainly the most ethical choice would be less animal experiments and more human experiments, since the results of human experiments are vastly more useful.

Re:Morals (1)

Ucklak (755284) | more than 7 years ago | (#17733922)

If killing one cow feeds ten people, then so be it.

PeTA's assertion is to kill ten people to save one cow.

People who favor PeTA's talking points will state that the cow doesn't need to die in order to feed ten people.

If you add that there isn't enough veggie food around to feed ten people for the immediate now and killing the cow is neccessary to feed said tem people, I say kill the cow, PeTA says kill the people.

Re:Morals (1)

Willuknight (872781) | more than 7 years ago | (#17734050)

You're a troll.

It takes something like 10 times the land to feed a herd of cows, for beef, then it would to use land to grow vegetables and feed the same number of people.

Re:Morals (1)

utopianfiat (774016) | more than 7 years ago | (#17734736)

Who cares? Everyone knows PETA are a bunch of deep-ecologist heideggerian neo-fascist ecoterrorists.
Groups like them that run off of totalitarian, violence-fueled leadership to promote anarchistic ideals should break up and their followers should get a fucking clue about the real problems in the world. People are dying in Iraq. Jesus Christ is killing the nation he "saved". America is slowly becoming a police state. Ganja is still illegal and nobody can give a solid reason why.
Animals are being exploited because we are humans and we exploit resources to live. If we need to exploit resources to live in luxury, so be it. If you want to protect animals, go ahead, make a shelter that guarantees that they can live a healthy, natural life if it makes you feel better.

Re:Morals (1)

mcostas (973159) | more than 7 years ago | (#17735154)

Animals are being exploited because we are humans and we exploit resources to live. If we need to exploit resources to live in luxury, so be it.
You seem confused. Humans are animals. There is no dividing line with homo sapiens on one side and all other species on the other. A dog is far more similar to a human than a dog is to a snake. So talking of "humans vs. animals" is really meaningless.

Nearly all species of adult mammals are individual sentient beings with a permanent psychoactive state. Even minor details in their brain structures and evolutionary history are shared with humans. Mammals are not "resources" any more than human slaves are "resources", i.e., humans do currently treat other species as resources, but only as part of a violent tradition rooted in ignorance that will one day be abolished.

Re:Morals (1)

utopianfiat (774016) | more than 7 years ago | (#17738998)

I don't think it's any more ignorant than letting free that species that will simply take our place. The lioness is no more a tyrant than Man.
Also, I think it's more ignorant to abolish the act of killing animals- that is to say, it's more horrifying that in a world where many people are still going hungry, you would remove one of the few sources of protein and lipids from their diet because of some misguided ethical observation that fits in with your world view.
First things first, total human liberation. Then we'll talk about the puppies and kitties.

Re:Morals (1)

lottameez (816335) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729142)

My cat would get her own human retinal samples if she could only figure out how to use a knife.

Re:Morals (1)

zobier (585066) | more than 7 years ago | (#17733528)

My cat would get her own human retinal samples if she could only figure out how to use a knife.
O RLY? [xs4all.nl]

Forget the Morals (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17729266)

Do these cats now make a cool "Tch tch tch tch tch tch" bionic-noise when they move? Because that would be awesome. People would come over and I'd say, "Watch out for my bionic cat," and they'd say, "Right, bionic cat, haha," and the cat would be all like, "Tch tch tch tch tch tch," and they'd be like "OMGWTF?" and I'd be like "ROTFLMAO!"

Do they make bionic gerbils? It's, erm, ahhhhh, for the cat....

Re:Morals (1)

MBCook (132727) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729390)

From the article:

"The researchers hope is that by finding a way to cure the condition in cats, they will be one step closer to getting regulatory approval to cause the disease for fun since it would them be curable. PETA was unavailable for comment, but the message on their answering machine hinted that they would not look favorably on this idea.:

Okay, so maybe that's not in the article.

My cat refuses to wake up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17731588)

How'd they keep the damn cat awake long enough to figure out if it's blind in the first place?

The Collective (2, Funny)

the dark hero (971268) | more than 7 years ago | (#17728938)

"Resistance is futile." - The Borg

Re:The Collective (2, Funny)

vertinox (846076) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729468)

Or in the case:

"Resistance is... Oooh! A peice of yarn!" *pounce* -Cat Borg

Zeus Fucks Twofo (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17728964)

Twofo [twofo.co.uk] Is Dying
It is official; Netcraft confirms: Twofo is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleagured University of Warwick [warwick.ac.uk] filesharing community when ITS confirmed that Twofo total share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all file sharing. Coming hot on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that Twofo has lost more share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Twofo is collapsing in complete disarry, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Student comprehensive leeching test.

You don't need to be one of the Hub Operators to predict Twofo's future. The hand writing is on the toilet wall: Twofo faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for Twofo because Twofo is dying. Things are looking very bad for Twofo. As many of us are already aware, Twofo continues to lose users. Fines and disconnections flow like a river of feces [tubgirl.com] .

N00b Campus users are the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of their total share. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time Twofo sharers fool_on_the_hill and Twinklefeet only serves to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: Twofo is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

Sources indicate that there are at most 150 users in the hub. How many filelists have been downloaded? Let's see. 719. But 1621 IP addresses have been logged, and 1727 nicks have been sighted connecting to one user over the last term. How many searches are there? 600 searches in 3 hours. The highest sharer on campus, known as "firstchoice", or Andrew.Maddison@warwick.ac.uk in real life, was sharing over 1 TiB, despite working in ITS and not being on the resnet. He's only there so people off campus who think they're too good for bittorrent can continue to abuse the University's internet connection.

Due to troubles at the University of Warwick, lack of internet bandwidth, enforcements of Acceptable Usage Policies, abysmal sharing, retarded leechers, clueless n00bs, and ITS fining and disconnecting users, Twofo has no future. All major student surveys show that Twofo has steadily declined in file share. Twofo is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If Twofo is to survive at all it will be among p2p hardcore fuckwits, desperate to grab stuff for free off the internet. Nothing short of a miracle could save Twofo from its fate at this point in time. For all practical purposes, Twofo is dead.

Fact: Twofo is dying

Re:Zeus Fucks Twofo (1)

Goaway (82658) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729126)

This promotion campaign of yours is really fucking pathetic, just FYI.

Ugh.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17729228)

How I long for the regular off topic posts, like those from the GNAA...

Gives a whole new meaning to the state of (1)

markov_chain (202465) | more than 7 years ago | (#17728968)

being chipped!

Impulses of light? (1)

x1n933k (966581) | more than 7 years ago | (#17730514)

To quote the article, "At this point, its impulses of light they're seeing (as opposed to images), but the aim of the research is to get more information out of the chip."

That's gotta be trippy.

[J]

Backwards? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17729028)

Don't you usually test these things on the animals first, and then try it on humans? Rather than the other way around.

Re:Backwards? (4, Funny)

ross.w (87751) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729058)

Not with cats. We exist only to serve their every need. If you didn't know this, you obviously never had a cat.

Cats==Gods (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17729150)

The Egyptians worshiped the cats as gods.

The cats have never forgotten this.

Saying on T-Shirt

Oblig (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17729068)

I for one, welcome our new feline cyborg overlords.

Re:Oblig (1)

adamlazz (975798) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729216)

And I, for one, would like to bring back a famous John Madden quote, modified to the slightest degree:

"Now, here's a blind guy, and when he puts in his chip covered with 5,000 microphotodiodes, he can see better."

Re:Oblig (1)

bubbl07 (777082) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729352)

Uh oh...

Better start masturbating before they get the rest of our eyes...

Re:Oblig (1)

greginnj (891863) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729896)


Biophysics? Check.

Animal experimentation? Check.

Advanced optics research? Check.

The Bulletin of Evil Scientists has just advanced the hands on its clock two minutes closer to midnight, as the ultimate goal of Sharks With Fricking Laser Beams appears to be that much closer to realization ...

Cats are faking it (1)

Hoi Polloi (522990) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729094)

My cats acts like he can't see the food I put in front of him. I think they are scamming the researchers.

Re:Cats are faking it (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729278)

My cats acts like he can't see the food I put in front of him.

Hide it someplace like it's something special you don't want him to get into. It'll be gone in seconds.

KFG

Re:Cats are faking it (1)

Hoi Polloi (522990) | more than 7 years ago | (#17738076)

Good idea. I'll either put it on the unstable pile of DVDs on top of the rack or in the jumble of cables behind my computer. I know he's familiar with both places already.

Re:Cats are faking it (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 7 years ago | (#17743968)

In all seriousness, cats are, by nature, sneaky eaters. They kill something and then drag it off somewhere to feast alone. Eating is not a social event for them. It is something to be done in solitude, where there is a feeling of security.

Even after millenia of domestication many cats, given their druthers, would still like the food to be behind the couch, not in front of their face.

KFG

Ob. Seinfeld (4, Funny)

Lord_Slepnir (585350) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729118)

I forget the exact quote, but it goes something like:

Vet: The is squirrel is badly hurt. it will require about $10,000 worth of surgery, plus we have to fly in a special set of instruments from Switzerland.
George: i see. How much to put the thing down?
Vet: About 65 cents.
George: hmm..
* Georges girlfriend shoots him the evil eye *
George: Um...just asking

Maybe I don't get it, but there are hundreds of sighted cats that are put down every day in shelters around the US. How about giving your blind cat the gift of mercy and adopting a new cat?

NOTE: Poster may be bitter about (1) having a finance whose apartment is infested with a cat and (2) being allergic to the damn things.

Re:Ob. Seinfeld (1)

Assassin bug (835070) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729276)

... And you are bound to your finance (I assume your Freudian slip was meant to state fiancé) by your own free will. A symphony of small violins for your sympathy.

Re:Ob. Seinfeld (1)

Lord_Slepnir (585350) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729316)

Less of a Freudian slip and more of a "Spell Checker" slip.

Re:Ob. Seinfeld (1)

Assassin bug (835070) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729426)

Yeah yeah. Sure it was. lol

Re:Ob. Seinfeld (2, Funny)

kfg (145172) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729342)

Poster may be bitter about (1) having a finance whose apartment is infested with a cat and (2) being allergic to the damn things.

Well then you should have talked her into just shacking up; and if you think you're allergic now, just wait until she becomes a wife.

KFG

Re:Ob. Seinfeld (1)

Volante3192 (953645) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729408)

Maybe I don't get it, but there are hundreds of sighted cats that are put down every day in shelters around the US. How about giving your blind cat the gift of mercy and adopting a new cat?

People get attached to the pets they have, not the ones you think they should have. You might as well just s/cat/kid there and see if it holds up as well.

Oh, and gift of mercy? Blindness isn't a terminal cancer.

Of course, using a sitcom is clearly the best source material to make a point from....

Re:Ob. Seinfeld (1)

BiggerIsBetter (682164) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729556)

Oh, and gift of mercy? Blindness isn't a terminal cancer.

The moms and kiddies want a fuzzball kitten to play with, not a quiet older cat who can't see.

Blindness isn't terminal, but being in the shelter for too long is.

Re:Ob. Seinfeld (1)

BiggerIsBetter (682164) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729502)

Neighbour has a blind, deaf cat he saved from a Vet. He likes being outside, but he's damn hard to find when he wanders off...

"Here kitty, kitty..."

Re:Ob. Seinfeld (1)

vertinox (846076) | more than 7 years ago | (#17730060)

Maybe I don't get it, but there are hundreds of sighted cats that are put down every day in shelters around the US. How about giving your blind cat the gift of mercy and adopting a new cat?

Well the researched and technology gained from these experiments will be helpful to restoring the sight of human subjects.

Unless you suggest we put old blind grandma down out of mercy too ;)

Re:Ob. Seinfeld (1)

r00t (33219) | more than 7 years ago | (#17731552)

Seriously, consider the cat to be a deal breaker.

It'll always be a thorn in your side. It's costly. It can make you sick. It can kill a baby. It will compete with you for attention. It will compete with your kids for attention. It won't go away; it will be replaced with another cat.

Re:Ob. Seinfeld (1)

the dark hero (971268) | more than 7 years ago | (#17731958)

so....the 65 cents is the cost of the bullet right? :P

Cure for cat allergy (1)

JourneyExpertApe (906162) | more than 7 years ago | (#17732430)

Step 1: Procure the following herbs (approx. 25 g each):
    i. English thyme
    ii. Hyssop
    iii. Lavender petals
    iv. Damiana leaves
    v. Green tea leaves
    vi. Jasmine petals (fresh)
Step 2: Bring one quart of distilled water to a boil.
Step 3: Place the aforementioned herbs in the boiling water and reduce the heat to low.
Step 4: Simmer on low for 30 min.
Step 5: Realize that your cat allergy is just a manifestation of your obvious latent homosexual tendencies that prevents you from engaging in frequent sexual relations with your girlfriend.
Step 6: Throw out that stinking mess on your stove top.

Gift of mercy indeed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17740346)

This is why I always kill anyone I meet who is in any way different. Blind people, deaf people, mute people, the mentally challenged, paraplegics, people with 6 toes, basically anyone with a non-life threatening disorder who could live a fullfilling life if I didn't kill them. I just tell their families I am giving the gift of mercy and direct them to adopt a starving african child to replace their loved one.

Schroedinger's Obligatory Cat Reference (2, Funny)

silentounce (1004459) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729242)

They've hit a snag in the research. It's quite puzzling. They've discovered that the cat can see and is blind at the same time.

Re:Schroedinger's Obligatory Cat Reference (1)

Rashdot (845549) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729364)

"They've discovered that the cat can see and is blind at the same time."

Plus it doesn't know where it is. That's why it's moving around all the time.

Hope (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729264)

> The hope is that the electrical activity in the optic nerve will encourage new retinal cells to
> grow

Yeah, I've got a machine which is self aware in my garage. Well, almost. It's got a flashing cursor and it can display pre-defined messages on the screen. The hope is that electrical activity around the CPU area will encourage some kind of cyber almost nearly virtual awareness in the memory banks and will allow it to pass the Turing test.

Re:Hope (1)

Original Replica (908688) | more than 7 years ago | (#17730668)

Try hitting it with 1.21 Gigawatts. or a hammer. When you go for the hammer, the screen should read "I can't let you do that, Dave."

Re:Hope (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17743074)

Has anybody ever commented on your amazing ability to make analogies that sound logical but are actually full of crap?

Impulses of Light? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17729274)

I don't think I would enjoy trying to sleep while "seeing" flashes of light...can you turn the thing off at night?

The $6,000,000 Pussy! (1)

ettlz (639203) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729296)

Nanananananananaaa!

Actually that didn't work out too well... I had something for a general audience in mind...

Next up.... (1)

whiskeyriver (909231) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729298)

Personally, I am patiently awaiting science to figure out a way to eliminate "bionic cat stink." That stuff is deadly. That will surely be a glorious day for all man(and cat)kind.

Remarkable (2, Insightful)

lastmachine (723265) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729346)

This together with the earlier post http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/2 3/1640254 [slashdot.org] about growing chains of neurons like an "extension cord" means that we are making huge advances in the soldering analogy with electronics--but in brains. Expect to see "leads" drawn from *specific sites* on brains to pins on processors or storage chips. I, for one, welcome our new overclocked overlords.

obligatory /. comment (0, Redundant)

mseidl (828824) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729394)

I for one welcome our new bionic kitten overlords...

Re:obligatory /. comment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17729440)

And they also run linux

Question for the experts (4, Interesting)

Control Group (105494) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729414)

I'm not a neurophysiologist, so perhaps the answer to this is obvious, but I've got a question: if the chip can detect light impulses and stimulate the optic nerve, why does there need to be cellular regeneration? Given time, wouldn't the brain learn to interpret those signals as optical input, just like it did with the rods and cones the eye was born with? Obviously, the "grain" and responsiveness of the photodiodes is much worse than that of the Mark I eyeball, but it's still a path for light information to get to the brain. The resultant "sight" would be far inferior to natural vision, but also better than blindness.

The human brain is nothing if not adaptable; I would think it could learn to use anything which was able to pump signals onto the optic nerve.

Or am I way off base?

Re:Question for the experts (1)

operagost (62405) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729794)

I would hope they extend the experiment long enough to see that happen, although I fear feline brains may not be sophisticated enough (no offense to my cat or any others out there).

Re:Question for the experts (4, Interesting)

Raindance (680694) | more than 7 years ago | (#17730818)

I'm not a neurophysiologist, so perhaps the answer to this is obvious, but I've got a question: if the chip can detect light impulses and stimulate the optic nerve, why does there need to be cellular regeneration? Given time, wouldn't the brain learn to interpret those signals as optical input, just like it did with the rods and cones the eye was born with? Obviously, the "grain" and responsiveness of the photodiodes is much worse than that of the Mark I eyeball, but it's still a path for light information to get to the brain. The resultant "sight" would be far inferior to natural vision, but also better than blindness.

The human brain is nothing if not adaptable; I would think it could learn to use anything which was able to pump signals onto the optic nerve.


I'm not a neurophysiologist either (perhaps BWJones will chip in here) but here's my two cents.

The chip can detect light impulses and stimulate the optic nerve, as you say- the article even mentions "We're placing it right where the photoreceptors are and if they're lacking, this is supposed to replace what they're doing." So why isn't this plug-and-play with our eyes- why do we need these implants to work via cellular regeneration?

Put simply, there is a limit to the eye's plasticity during maturity-- if these cats had been born with these chips implanted in their eyes, they could probably use them to see in some fashion (at lower quality, as you note). However, they're so far out of spec with the type of input given by normal photoreceptors (with which they're currently operating in parallel) that the mature eye/brain calibrated to normal photoreceptors simply tends to screen these inputs out.

Someday we'll understand the "spec" of the eye well enough for tech that plugs-and-plays with the rest of the eye, but currently we're limited to promoting the body's own healing, or, in cases of total blindness, just bypassing the eye and just stimulating the visual cortex directly (at very low resolution).

Re:Question for the experts (1)

Zeek40 (1017978) | more than 7 years ago | (#17736528)

I hope you're right. I can't wait for my thermal vision eye implants :)

Let's All Pray to the Cat's Eye! (1)

adavies42 (746183) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729422)

Oingo Boingo [terra.com.br] forever!

More about Cat eyes than human eyes (2, Interesting)

sanjacguy (908392) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729442)

My ex-wife's mother (what the heck do you call her, an ex-mother-in-law?) - worked at a highly prestigious university studying the optics of cat eyes. Back in the mid-nineties, we knew more about cat eyes through direct experimentation than human eyes, for obvious reasons. (Before you ask, yes, the cats were destroyed humanely during the process.)

Please keep in mind that there are many levels of clinical trials to go. If you wish to further this type of work, please consider donating your eyes upon your demise. Whether they're donated to science or to help someone else's vision more directly, you're still giving yourself so that others might not suffer. After all, it's not like you'll be using 'em any more.

The irony here is that my ex-wife loves cats.

humanely? (1)

r00t (33219) | more than 7 years ago | (#17731584)

They should be been destroyed cately.

Re:humanely? (1)

cakefool (801210) | more than 7 years ago | (#17736330)

Savaged, played with for 1/2 hour then left to die under the bed?

Energy to the Blind (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729554)

The chips, which provide their own energy


How the hell do they do that? Self-powering a bioimplant sounds even more exciting than the holy grail of "eyesight to the blind".

Re:Energy to the Blind (1)

operagost (62405) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729844)

Probably a small chunk of radium or something. So they're Radioactive Feline Experimental Cyborgs from Missouri. Might make a fun action show for the kids if we can change Missouri to "Los Angeles" or "Tokyo" or something snazzy.

Re:Energy to the Blind (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17730354)

Bad explanation of them being photovoltaic possibly?

Medical DRM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17729590)

Giant Medical Megacorp: We will unlock the DRM and allow you to see in higher definition for another $2000 per month.

Hmm (1)

kitsunewarlock (971818) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729684)

Cat got your...eye? This makes the whole "cats eating your eyes when you die" thing even creepier.

The $6 million cat (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17729798)

We can rebuild Fluffy, stronger than before, faster, better, able to leap from the floor to the kitchen counter where you're preparing the meat for your dinner in a single bound.

Oh, and by the way, Fluffy says you can forget about feeding her any more dry food.

how do I get one? (1)

jjeffries (17675) | more than 7 years ago | (#17729890)

mememe!!! I want a bionic cat eye implant, where do I sign up?

I had a blind cat. (2, Interesting)

funwithBSD (245349) | more than 7 years ago | (#17730182)

She needed no sight. Before we rescued her she gave birth and raised a litter of kittens. By far she was the most effective killer I have ever seen, snatching bugs and birds out of the air with terrifying accuracy.

Her downfall was when threatened she never backed down I presume because she could not see where was safest. Stood her ground against pit bull that got loose. She had to be put down because of a broken back. The dog didn't make it either after she gutted his throat arteries.

Take care of your pet shit for brains. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17739666)

Don't just let your blind cat go wandering around outside numb nuts, go out with her and watch her so you know she will be safe. Would you let a toddler play outside by itself where it can be run over or mauled by a dog? Worse yet, a blind toddler?

WTF is wrong with a cane and sunglasses (1)

andy314159pi (787550) | more than 7 years ago | (#17730536)

back in the day we'd just give that cat one of those whippy canes and some sunglasses. These modern cats are spoiled.

PICTURES (2, Insightful)

nilbog (732352) | more than 7 years ago | (#17730666)

The only thing I look for with a story like this is a damn picture. So many stories talk about something I just want to see, but have no picture. Is it lazy journalism? Dammit, I just want to see a cat that looks like a borg, okay?

AFFlicted... or... (1)

davidsyes (765062) | more than 7 years ago | (#17731120)

INflicted, to SEE or NOT to see... THAT is the question....

Cats eyes (1)

njh (24312) | more than 7 years ago | (#17732756)

Do they just peel them off the road, or what?

Re:Cats eyes (1)

scoot80 (1017822) | more than 7 years ago | (#17733044)

off bicycles more likely..

This FP for GNaA? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17733396)

for troll5'

ni6ga (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17733840)

Veeeery popular story (1)

KlausBreuer (105581) | more than 7 years ago | (#17736468)

...mention both 'bionics' and 'cats', and you'll have an enormous cloud of geeks following your every step.

No, the cat does not "got my tongue." (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | more than 7 years ago | (#17738598)

> The implants are 2-millimeter-wide chips surgically implanted in the back of eye.
> The article makes clear that the implants don't allow the cats to see -- what
> they get [are] impulses of light.

Man, and I thought tying a bell to it's tail would make the cat run around crazy! These guys are serious.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>