Could Implantable Nanochips Revolutionize Immunity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter gravenewworld
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Technology Years
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of implantable nanochips that could synthesize peptides to enhance immunity against pathogens. Participants explore the feasibility, implications, and potential risks of such technology, as well as broader reflections on predicting future technological advancements.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose the idea of a nanochip that could synthesize peptides on demand to boost immunity, likening it to a software update for humans.
  • Others argue that this approach merely accelerates vaccination and raises concerns about cybersecurity risks, suggesting that current vaccination methods are more effective and less risky.
  • There are discussions about the unpredictability of future technological advancements, with references to historical figures like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and their inability to foresee modern technologies.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the accuracy of predictions regarding future technology, citing a lack of historical precedent for reliable forecasting.
  • There are mentions of the need for advancements in other areas, such as ecological energy production and economic models, rather than focusing solely on nanochip technology.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of opinions, with no clear consensus on the viability or desirability of implantable nanochips for immunity enhancement. There is also a shared acknowledgment of the challenges in predicting future technologies, but differing views on the implications of such unpredictability.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the limitations of current economic theories and the need for sustainable solutions, suggesting that the discussion on nanochips intersects with broader societal issues.

gravenewworld
Messages
1,129
Reaction score
27
What would be cool to have?

What if we could shrink a peptide synthesis machine onto an implantable nanochip and wirelessly send it instructions to generate any sequence of peptides we wanted? If a pathogen mutates, maybe you could find something immunogenic on its surface, send the peptide sequence after figuring out what it is to the nanochip and have it synthesize the peptide which would hopefully be attacked by the immune system and help boost innate immunity. It would be like a virus software update for humans!
 
Computer science news on Phys.org
Let me get your idea straight: a pathogen is discovered, an appropriate antigen is determined, the sequence of this antigen is emailed to this nanochip* implant, the implant synthesises it conferring immunity? It seems all you have done here is slightly speed up vacination by having people synthesise the vaccine inside themselves rather than get it injected. Considering the risk involved in your proposal (how would cyberwarfare look if you could hack everyone's chip and infect them all with botulinum toxin?) and the ease of vaccination IRL I'm not seeing a positive cost/benefit ratio. What would really help in this field is technology that allows for cheap and rapid characterisation of antigens and technology allowing for cheap and rapid clinical testing (e.g. complex 3d tissue constructs). With the rise of mass transit, environmental infiltration, urbanisation and antibiotic resistance it will become increasingly important in the future to be able to identify and develop treatments and vaccines for infectious diseases.

From my point of view one "cool" thing to have in the future would be a socioeconomic model that guarantees the elimination of absolute poverty and ensures general prosperity in a sustainable manner. Get that right and we can breathe a sigh of relief before heading off to solve other problems.

*This may be a personal bugbear but gratuitous use of the nano- prefix is incredibly common and detracts from the actual discipline IMO by conveying no information other than "doesn't this sound sexy and futuristic?? Invest!"
 
Predicting 200 years in the future is very, very difficult. Do you think George Washington could have forseen a man on the moon? Or Thomas Jefferson could have predicted cell phones?
 
phyzguy said:
Predicting 200 years in the future is very, very difficult. Do you think George Washington could have forseen a man on the moon? Or Thomas Jefferson could have predicted cell phones?
Agreed. The further out we try to predict the greater the chance of an uknown unknown cropping up and changing everything. It might be possible to look toward the year 2022 and predict that most things would probably be exactly the same (including various artefacts of technology from today e.g. cutlery, shops, cars) as well as predict which things that we don't have now we probably will have (policies/technologies that are on the horizon e.g. AR glasses) but its likely that one or more black swan events will occur that radically change the landscape.
 
I'd say I'm looking forward to progress in computing like quantum computers. Human intelligence and ingenuity are great, but brute force number crunching can save centuries of effort for things we really need help with today. For example, as far as I'm concerned current economic theories are little better than a pot belly stove when what we require is a ecologically friendly jet engine.
 
wuliheron said:
as far as I'm concerned current economic theories are little better than a pot belly stove
Hence why a positive new paradigm would be pretty good.
wuliheron said:
when what we require is a ecologically friendly jet engine.
I see your ecologically friendly jet engine and raise you ecologically friendly, economically viable energy production.
 
gravenewworld said:
What would be cool to have?

What if we could shrink a peptide synthesis machine onto an implantable nanochip and wirelessly send it instructions to generate any sequence of peptides we wanted? If a pathogen mutates, maybe you could find something immunogenic on its surface, send the peptide sequence after figuring out what it is to the nanochip and have it synthesize the peptide which would hopefully be attacked by the immune system and help boost innate immunity. It would be like a virus software update for humans!

Wonder what the newest release of WoW would be like?? :smile:
 
phyzguy said:
Predicting 200 years in the future is very, very difficult. Do you think George Washington could have forseen a man on the moon? Or Thomas Jefferson could have predicted cell phones?

I wonder what Washington and Jefferson would have thought of the Supreme Court decision making corporations persons.
 
  • #10

Similar threads

Medical Creating Pseudo Vaccines: The Potential of Synthetic Antigens and Peptides
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
6K
Engineered white blood cells may eliminate cancer?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Messenger RNA (mRNA) - not just for Coronavirus vaccines
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Immune System: Nanobots, Implants & Defenses
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Highjack Hostages: Cyber Extortion and Ransomware Threats
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Ten reasons why HIV could not cause AIDS , from my inbox
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
17K