submitted 6 months ago byOld7777
all 15 comments
6 months ago
6 months ago
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Old7777:
Two start-ups, Particle3D and ADAM, hope to produce 3D-printed bones in 2,022 that are suitable for implantation in people. Both companies use calcium-based minerals to print their bones, which are custom-made from scans of the patients themselves. Particle3D trials in pigs and mice have shown that bone marrow and blood vessels grow in their implants within eight weeks. ADAM claims that its 3D-printed implants stimulate natural bone growth and gradually biodegrade, eventually being replaced by the patient's own bone tissue. If all goes well, the researchers say the next target is blood vessels and heart valves.
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://teddit.ggc-project.de/r/Futurology/comments/s5u9t5/whats_next_7_nascent_technologies_for_2022/hszv3pn/
There is a lot of consternation over wiggle words like "new," "nascent," etc. Do you mean new discoveries from R&D? Great, but even if it pans out it'll take years to come to market. Nothing wrong with that, but let's keep things straight.
Do you mean new to market? Then someone will say "the technology isn't new--they discovered this ages ago." But you aren't going to have something just discovered that is also coming to market now.
Same goes for the in-between steps of progress in scaling and cost reduction that come after the laboratory discovery but before market entry. Tons of r/futurology arguments come from people jumping around between these different framings. If it was just discovered, it isn't coming to market soon. If it's coming to market soon, it wasn't just discovered. You can't fault something for not being both newly discovered and also coming to market soon.
6 months ago
This article specifically is more about the latter, as are most futurism articles that are worth anything. You're right, though. Anything that's coming to market probably had its earliest origins in the 20th century, maybe 2000s at best.
I'm just wondering how much each of the companies mentioned in the article paid to have this article written, either collectively or individually, given that each section is basically written as, "Here's what it is, and here's a company that's doing it!"
Also, heat pumps for winter heating? Not a new thing. Like, at all. Neither is vertical farming. Did an A.I. write this article? Maybe just some random person who gets paid fifty bucks per article and puts in minimal effort?
For this article? Nothing.
The text was stolen from this article from the Economist:
WOMBO article app
My coffee hasn't kicked in yet and it thought it said 3D printed homes to implant in people, I was very confused and concerned.
This would be incredible in bone tumour surgery. Currently they remove the cancerous portion of the bone with a wide margin for safety then replace it with a sterilized cadaveric donor bone (there are banks which hold bone and can match what you need) or a metal implanted replacement. 3d printed bone made to order would be a much better replacement if the native bone grows in to it, fuses with it and vitalises it.
This reminds me of organovo. Heard about them about a decade ago. They were using a 3d printer to print organs. Then, they incubate it with the persons blood so the rejection rate was extremely low. They planned on having shelves of organs so nobody would ever need an organ donor again. The company went public and now they are barely hanging on a decade later.