3D PRINTING SCRAPBOOK: FIRST HUMAN HEART 3D PRINTED

If you've been following the three-d printing/additive manufacturing story, and the genetic engineering story, you'll be interested in this one. Frankly, I view it with a mixture of ambivalence, as being something that could be profoundly good, and profoundly bad. The story, as you can guess from the headline, is about the fact that some scientists have now 3-d printed the first artificial human heart. But there's a catch here, and it's a profound one, in this article shared by V.T.:

Major Medical Breakthrough: 3D Heart Printed Using Patient’s Own Cells and Materials

The engineered heart completely matches the immunological, cellular, biochemical and anatomical properties of the patient

In a major medical breakthrough, Tel Aviv University researchers have "printed" the world's first 3D vascularised engineered heart using a patient's own cells and biological materials. Their findings were published on April 15 in a study in Advanced Science.

Until now, scientists in regenerative medicine — a field positioned at the crossroads of biology and technology — have been successful in printing only simple tissues without blood vessels.

I was struck by the fact that apparently, no babies were aborted, ground up, and fetal stem cell tissue harvested to accomplish the feat, which seems all but par for the course for similar developments elsewhere in the world. And the utility of the accomplishment, using a patient's own cells, is rather obvious, as the article points out:

For the research, a biopsy of fatty tissue was taken from patients. The cellular and a-cellular materials of the tissue were then separated. While the cells were reprogrammed to become pluripotent stem cells, the extracellular matrix (ECM), a three-dimensional network of extracellular macromolecules such as collagen and glycoproteins, were processed into a personalized hydrogel that served as the printing "ink."

After being mixed with the hydrogel, the cells were efficiently differentiated to cardiac or endothelial cells to create patient-specific, immune-compatible cardiac patches with blood vessels and, subsequently, an entire heart.

According to Prof. Dvir, the use of "native" patient-specific materials is crucial to successfully engineering tissues and organs.

"The biocompatibility of engineered materials is crucial to eliminating the risk of implant rejection, which jeopardizes the success of such treatments," Prof. Dvir says. "Ideally, the biomaterial should possess the same biochemical, mechanical and topographical properties of the patient's own tissues. Here, we can report a simple approach to 3D-printed thick, vascularized and perfusable cardiac tissues that completely match the immunological, cellular, biochemical and anatomical properties of the patient."

The researchers are now planning on culturing the printed hearts in the lab and "teaching them to behave" like hearts, Prof. Dvir says. They then plan to transplant the 3D-printed heart in animal models.

Of course, the implication here is obvious: if one can do this with hearts, one can do it for almost any organ in the body once they "wear out" and need replacement: "Maybe, in ten years," the article concludes, "there will be organ printers in the finest hospitals around the world, and these procedures will be conducted routinely."

Probably so. One can even envision a time or circumstance that the technology becomes so commonplace that the procedure becomes cheap, affordable, and can be done by "licensed organ printers" rather than doctors, in a kind of out patient procedure. And while we're indulging in all this high octane speculation, one my even envision a kind of "organ dealership" or "Jiffy Lube," a kind of drive-through organ replacement "garage," complete with warranties and expiration dates, and so on.

Now, on the one hand, I can see that this developing technology is a good thing, because it extends life, and life is a good thing. Call me old fashioned, but I believe ardently in the sanctity of life. But it's that, precisely, that also bothers me here, with the article's own admission that one can envision a whole new branch of medicine emerging: organ-printing and replacement, and with it, a cheapening of life, a view that our bodies are so many collections of organs to be replaced when "worn out." I wrote about this years ago, at the very end of my first "foray" into this strange alternative research field, in The Giza Death Star. I wrote about it in the context of a view of those ancient texts which record extraordinarily long life spans for our early ancestors. The biblical texts have humans living in some cases from half a millennium to almost a thousand years. In the Mesopotamian and Egyptian king's lists, these life spans stretch tens of thousands and sometimes even hundreds of thousands of years.

And with the advent of this new "organ-printing and replacement" branch of medicine, once again modern science is providing a context from which to view those ancient claims as perhaps having a basis in a similar technological reality. But as I put it at the end of The Giza Death Star, the danger of viewing organs as so many replaceable "body parts" is what it does to the human spirit. As I warned then, the danger of becoming bored with life to the point of a kind of nihilistic anomie or antinomianism emerges, and one can imagine the emergence of a Hitler or a Stalin with thousands of years to perfect the evil in their souls. On can, of course, imagine a Francis of Assisi or Seraphim of Sarov perfecting their sanctity as well. It's that potentiality that raises another high octane speculation: imagine also a "board" which must "approve" people to be recipients of such medical-technological boons. To be "approved," one will have to have demonstrated holding the "correct opinions." And given the fact that certain state legislatures are openly applauding the passage of full term abortion laws, and that certain state governors in this country are openly and calmly talking about "post-birth abortions" - infanticide - on television, one can fairly guess that people like Seraphim of Sarov or Francis of Assisi won't be on the list of "acceptable recipients."

See you on the flip side...

 

 

22 thoughts on “3D PRINTING SCRAPBOOK: FIRST HUMAN HEART 3D PRINTED”

  1. Wow. With Biden’s refreshed appearance a new issue might becoming this election. Do you want a real human or partial human to be your president? Which types are starting to be offered now? Are we supposed to read “Tells” on real people? Or do we need label legislation requiring the full disclosure of what we no longer be able to detect using our still 100% human qualities.? Will the legislation be activated in time for 2020?

  2. @ OrigensChild…
    that gives me thought that the new organs, although from the recipient’s own DNA, might have a mind of it’s own. those new organs gang up on the old body, killing it bit by bit, and being replaced by the gang’s new members. the new kid(ney)s on the block. invasion of the body snatchers.

    Robert Heinlein covered Lazurus Long living 500 years and relieving boredom for a bit by doing a Wild West Hero (Jeff Lynn/ELO) stint before giving up on it (life) voluntarily.

    One might get one’s memories erased to be ‘born again’.

    also I wonder if a Star Trek style transported would scan the traveller, send that information to the 3d printer back on board, then kill the traveller or leave them there. you would need mind transfer as well which gets into questions about what that, and soul, is.

    if 3d kidneys can be printed, what reason would the RaeIsli’s have to keep the Palestinians kids around apart from something to throw stones around in glass houses?

    1. for some reason the mod keeps dissappearing the link at bit ch ute

      dot bit ch ute dot com/video/KRBMaw_erWk/

      now that i’m looking at it, the mod probably just slapped down any comments reading it as the b word.

  3. the point about slippery slopes we’re already running down and dentistry is easier to see when one’s own teeth are hurting and they see all around them mouths full of teeth of varying quality. it’s not just all about age. wealth is a much greater determinant of dental health. obviously. it’s not cheap to be raised healthy (ask the peoples weston price studied).

  4. farmer lost his horse. neighbor exclaimed how unluck that was since he needed his horse. farmer replied, we’ll see. then farmer got horse back. neighbor exclaimed how lucky that is. farmer replied, we’ll see (see a pattern here yet?). farmer’s son fell off horse, broke his leg. neighbor said his usual and farmer replied his usual. then army invaded, marched through and conscripted all young men – except broken legged farmers son. the neighbor who wouldn’t learn from farmer yet exclaimed how lucky he was. farmer replied?????? and this goes on.

    there was never a reason to use fetal stem cells
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCnrW3VF0pc&t=41s
    The HighWire with Del Bigtree
    Trailblazing stem cell researcher Dr. Theresa Deisher, Ph.D. tells all. From episode 56 of The #HighWire.

    1. we’re talking about a slippery slope of healthcare standards here. it’s a slope we (everyone) has been slipping on for generations. think more mundane healthcare for people who failed to live appropriately – dental care much anyone? just like orwell, the issues raised are way past tense. what’s worth noting here is just like stem cell breakthroughs past, the public knowledge was pooched – er managed dishonestly.

      more mundane and common healthcare might be the light to consider this in. how many of us would not prefer our own teeth over mercury laden fillings, or titanium implants or someone else’s bone grafs?

      https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-stemcells-tooth-idUSTRE76B4EI20110712
      Experts grow whole tooth units using mouse stem cells

      i think the uk did this 10 or 15 years ago. does anyone doubt a viable market for our own teeth to replace the denture industry? anyone else doubt that the ussa will hold back the advances in this field?

      1. Robert Barricklow

        When the healthcare system’s bottom line is profit you get the USA health system.
        All systems need a paradigm shift from profit to the obvious bottom line. Healthcare’s bottom line; for example, would be health[obvious]. The answers are really easy and not rocket science.
        That’s why rocket science is using chemicals, instead of anti-gravity technologies. Follow the money; which is shaping the technologies.
        It’s not rocket science.
        The bottom line in health is health; not profits.

  5. Thoughts brought-up by this article:

    This gives a ‘test’ to Dr. Robert O. Becker’s The Body Electric: Electromagnetism and the Foundation of Life . Can you just “drop in” an artificially-mapped organ and have it take-up that body’s Electromagnetic whole?

    Taken to its logical extreme, the PTB will have whole shelves of artificially-mapped organs on tap (probably with everlasting-production, so to have redundancy and ‘fresh’ organs). This leads to yet another “let them eat cake” condition, where the average citizen does not have access (even if they wanted it) to this ‘cornucopia’.

    Most importantly, this would be yet another ‘dividing line’ between Advanced Humans and Technological Humans. There are lots of tales (derisively thrown-out these days by professional Skeptics) where ‘talented’ humans were able to reverse illnesses and even regenerate organs. Availability of these artificially-mapped organs would tend to separate-out those willing to learn ‘talents’ from those who are mere transhumanists. (Kind of reminds me of the Stargate TV series, where the ‘Ancients’ divided into those heading for ascension and those mastering technology…)

  6. Look on the bright side no more Heart Farms, The Island scenarios. On the other hand, there is The Clone Wars scenario and our evil elites extending their evil for who knows how long.

    1. good point marcos. that’s an argument that the underworld pedavoric breakaway class will hold this tech back and protect their blackmarket organ harvesting profits.

  7. One has to wonder if this technology will advance to the point they can just print the organ while you’re still on the table on life support insuring all the appropriate connections are made with digital precision; no need for stitches.
    Brain transplant anyone? Oops, it’s a blank slate.
    As usual, all the wrong people will be the beneficiary of this technology.

  8. There is evidence that the taking of C60 can radically increase natural stem cell production, with all the advantages this involves; the decline in such production is seen in ageing. This would be a more holistic approach in contrast to the outdated mechanistic mindset.
    Nevertheless, IF the “organ printing” technique is reliable, it could reduce the plague of human organ harvesting. Some day.

    1. As a recovering technologist (no 12-step program for that!), I have often expressed the opinion that the human body represents the highest technology available to our spirit/consciousness. This blog by Dr. Farrell explores how human spirit/consciousness has developed a way to keep the body functioning beyond its what is a “normal” timeframe. But have you ever wondered as have I why it should be necessary to effect repair of our bodies with derivative parts; that is with artificial processes derived outside of consciousness when it has been proven that the mechanisms and intelligence for effecting such repairs are extant within our very human existence.? Are we simply being led to falsely believe that we are incapable of existing to our maximum potential without the use of artificial mechanisms/intelligence? For if we could eschew those memes, the ethical quandary expressed in this blog might all but disappear.

  9. (I have a) Curious question about this technique. Transplant patients, upon receiving an organ from a donor, seem to acquire certain memories, tastes, smells and odd, idiosyncratic features from the donor also. Scientific materialists call this phenomenon cellular memory, whereas others believe such memories are transduced into the new host from the donor’s DNA resonating properties. Granted, these 3D hearts are constructed from tissues from the hosts. The immediate physiological benefits are somewhat obvious. But physicians and researchers are often more focused on the biological, chemical and genetic processes and are clueless about the personal and spiritual aspects of these stories. What happens when the recipient receives a 3D printed organ constructed from his or her own tissues? Do they have any of the side effects previous mentioned? In other words, does the 3D printed organism provide additional memories from the effects of 3D printing accumulated during production of the organ as the tissues undergo transformation? The answer to this question might have profound implications.

    1. also brings to mind: what about addressing the issue that caused the organ need in the first place. cancer is fungi is fermenting instead of respiring mitochondria (see thomas seyfried and otto warburg and others). ms, als, heart disease,…………………….. these are all sold as genetic this or unlucky unknowable etiology that. these are all metabolic diseases. they’re facets all of the same thing. mitochondria environmentally screwed countless ways to sunday that tear us up epigenetically. perhaps learning what hurts us with countless trials and errors (groundhogs day) will wise up some evil jerks into a bit more wisdom?

  10. As always mentioned, if this tech is breaking into the public news now then its been around for some time already and provides answers as to how some of these ‘elites’ manage to have remarkable physical prowess when in their 90s compared with everyone else.

  11. anakephalaiosis

    SQUARE POINT THEATER 42
    Fear of afterlife
    seeking spare parts for clone
    with no copyright.

Comments are closed.